its funny how they call this christian fiction... Showing 701-750 of 1,587

[Hazel]

I too am proud of my nerdiness, and I too will be adopting the collective noun "nerdle"

[Mary]

Will wrote: "I take pride in my nerd-ness :P

I like this new word "nerdle.""

Yeah...I take pride in mine too.

[Mary]

Hazel wrote: "I too am proud of my nerdiness, and I too will be adopting the collective noun "nerdle""

My husband will be thrilled that his term is taking off .

[Will]

Shaun wrote: "The 1st two are probably the weakest. At that time, Pratchett was just using the discworld as a medium through which to parody other well known fantasy authors and conventions.

Equal Rites is the 1st one to be more concerned with plot than parody, and from that point on it just gets better and better. IMO, where it really takes off is in Guards Guards, which really marks the beginning of the discworld (and specifically, the city of Ankh-Morpork) as a fully internally consistent setting.
"

So, they get more serious and less comedic? Because I actually really enjoyed the satirical nature of the first two. Had me laughing out loud many times. I think I may actually get disappointed if they lose their humor. I thought that's what made it really stand out.

[Hazel]

hell no, they get funnier, Will. Compared to later books, the first two always came across as bit damp.

[Shaun]

Oh no, they keep their humour. But it is a humour that stands alone.

I've always felt that the 1st two books require teh reader to be familiar with the characters they are satirising to get the most out of them, but the other books remain briliantly funny without requiring any pre-reading.

[Will]

Shew! Okay then, I'm definitely going to continue through the series then. At least when I can find book 3 at the used bookstore.

[Mary]

Will wrote: "Shew! Okay then, I'm definitely going to continue through the series then. At least when I can find book 3 at the used bookstore."

If you order it used from amazon, you can get it for $4. Also, if you have an e-reader, you can probably check it out from the library or get on a waiting list without ever having to leave your house.

[Will]

I have to have a physical copy. It's a disease.

Does the 4 include shipping? If I can find it at the used bookstore it would probably be 3 bucks and no shipping :]

[Shaun]

Don't worry about order, entirely. Book 3 stands alone (well, at least until book 38). It does introduce Granny Weatherwax but she isn't really the same character as appears in later books.

Loosely, the books can be thought of as 6 Series (there is a lot of crossover, mind you) plus a number of stand alones.

The series, roughly, are

Rincewind (And The Wizards) (1, 2, 5, 9, 17, 22, 27 and loosely, 37)
The Witches (3, 6, 12, 14, 18, 23)
The Guards (8, 15, 19, 21, 24, 29, 34, 39)
Death (and Susan) (4, 11, 16, 20, 26)
Tiffany Aching (a subset of the witches) (30, 32, 35, 38)
Moist von Lipwig (33, 36)

There are a lot of internal cross-references (stand alone "The Monstrous regiment" has characters from the guards, and from stand alone "The Truth") but most of the books can be read on their own.

Sorry, we seem to be way off topic now ;)

[Hazel]

The main reason that these books can be read out of order is that Terry is good enough to provide footnotes, which often are just humorous asides, but other times can involve explaining what has happened in an earlier book so you can understand the reference in this one

[Will]

I'll probably just read them chronologically anyway. There has to be some value in reading them in the same order they were written.

[Molly]

Hazel wrote: "Mary wrote: "Hazel wrote: "I just asked, and it is mostly ask questions that the schizophrenic can't possibly know the answer to.

And Mary, now you're sounding like a Terry Pratchett novel :P"

W..."

Small Gods is actually one of my favorite books. Not just in the Discworld series, but in general.

[Shaun]

Will wrote: "I'll probably just read them chronologically anyway. There has to be some value in reading them in the same order they were written."

As you have read the 1st 2 and enjoyed them, then yes.

For a new reader, I don't recommend starting with the 1st 2 as they are not as good as the later ones, and I would hate people to be put off before discovering how clever and funny Pratchett can be.

I tend to recommend people start with the Guards series, personally. Other fans may of course disagree ;)

[Molly]

Shaun wrote: "Will wrote: "I'll probably just read them chronologically anyway. There has to be some value in reading them in the same order they were written."

As you have read the 1st 2 and enjoyed them, then..."

I'd say the Guards books or the Witches books. I usually recommend the Witches for people who are into fairytale-esque stories.

[Shaun]

I will confess that in the most recent book, Snuff, I felt that Vimes was becoming a bit of a Mary Sue.

[Hazel]

I loved Snuff.

[Molly]

Shaun wrote: "I will confess that in the most recent book, Snuff, I felt that Vimes was becoming a bit of a Mary Sue."

Yeah, I felt that way too. He's become a bit too superhuman in this book. It killed the suspense for me. I was hoping being out of the city would be a major weakness for him, since things tend to work differently in the country, and he would be more out of his depth, but it didn't in the end.

[Mary]

Will wrote: "I have to have a physical copy. It's a disease.

Does the 4 include shipping? If I can find it at the used bookstore it would probably be 3 bucks and no shipping :]"

$4 includes shipping. They have it for 1 cent and you pay $3.99 shipping. I held out on the kindle for a good while. I also love a physical copy. I probably have 2-3,000 books in my house. I bought my youngest daughter a kindle about 2 years ago (made her be the guinea pig). Then I got one for Xmas this year and I LOVE IT!!! I have a library with me wherever I go!

[[deleted user]]

Hmm. Have any of you ever read any other Christian fiction books? Just wondering. out of curiosity.

[Will]

Yes, The Bible.

[[deleted user]]

I said fiction . The Bible is not included in that.

[Shanna]

It is on my bookshelves

[Will]

On a serious note, The Chronicles of Narnia (still have the box set from when I was a child), The Seven Sleepers Series (Flight Of The Eagles), Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold, Frank Paretti's The Cooper Kids series (The Tombs of Anak), etc. Probably lots more.

[Will]

Kendra wrote: "I said fiction."

That was the point of the joke.

[Will]

I read The Shack. Terrible book.

[[deleted user]]

Will wrote: "Kendra wrote: "I said fiction."

That was the point of the joke."

-I didn't find it funny at all.
-I've heard of "The Shack", but haven't read it yet. Why didn't you like it?
-I've read Frank E. Peretti's "The Cooper Kids" series, but not many of those. I liked them okay........when I was younger. LOL

[Mary]

Kendra wrote: "Hmm. Have any of you ever read any other Christian fiction books? Just wondering. out of curiosity."
Some books and authors I recall as being Christian writers/books:

The Narnia books
"Christy" by Catherine Marshall
Andrew Greeley
Earl Hamner Jr.
Jan Karon
Grace Livingston Hill
DeeAnne Gist
Julie Klassen
"Bird by Bird" by Anne Lamott
Are you looking only for Christian fiction or G-Rated? I can recommend quite a few classics if you are interested.

[[deleted user]]

I have read "Christy"--good book. Saw the first movie, too. I've heard of read some of Jan Karon and Grace Livingston Hill (have some of her books, actually). I've also heard of the Narnia books, but I've only ever seen the very first movie in that series. My life is truly "no fun". LOL

Uhm..........well, I prefer Christian fiction, but if you ahve any others that are decent - with as little swearing/"scenes" as possible - that'd be best. Thank, mary. I didn't expect anything from anyone.

[Mary]

Well if you want the best romance of all time, then you need to read Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. It was written in the early 19th century, so I do not know if that is your style. Also, Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. What do you like to read the most?

[Shanna]

Don't know if I'd call P&P christian. The only two overtly religious characters in the book Mary and Mr Collins' were both cast as ridiculous. Otherwise nothing religious is mentioned. Good book though.

[Mary]

No P&P is not Christian fiction, but it is G-Rated . It is also one of those classics that everyone ought to try and read just once (of course I have read it about 40 times). :0)

[[deleted user]]

Shanna wrote: "Don't know if I'd call P&P christian. The only two overtly religious characters in the book Mary and Mr Collins' were both cast as ridiculous. Otherwise nothing religious is mentioned. Good book th..."

I don't know that I would do call it religious, either. I've seen the movie (I know that movies are rarely anything like the book. I'll have to read it some time).

The kind of book I like to read is CHRISTIAN fiction. Please don't include the Bible in that category. To me, it is 100% factual.

[Mary]

Kendra wrote: "I don't know that I would do call it religious, either. I've seen the movie (I know that movies are rarely anything like the book. I'll have to read it some time). "

No it is not religious, but you asked for others with as little swearing scenes as possible. Which version of the movie did you see? The one that is closest to the book is the BBC miniseries with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. The most romantic is probably the one with Keira Knightley.

[Will]

Kendra wrote: "To me, it is 100% factual"

Well, I know you haven't been paying much attention to what people here have been saying, but we've shown you how the Bible is overtly not 100% factual.

[Shanna]

Kendra, have you investigated the many religious and christian groups on goodreads that I'm sure have many suggestions on their bookshelves that you might like?

You say the bible is 100% factual, what about Matthew 27:52 when the zombie saint's/prophet's rose from the grave after Jesus' death and walked the streets of Jerusalem and were seen by many?

[Shaun]

Kendra wrote: "The kind of book I like to read is CHRISTIAN fiction. Please don't include the Bible in that category. To me, it is 100% factual. "

To be honest, Kendra, this is the sort of statement that damages the credibility of even the most well meaning Christian.

With the best will in the world, the simple fact of it is that the bible does make certain statements about the world that can be demonstrated to be factually incorrect. When you claim otherwise to people that genuinely know better, you make Christians seem a little foolish and uneducated.

And once you appear to be letting the Bible override simple observable facts in quite trivial areas, you make it very hard for people to take you seriously in the important areas such as accepting Jesus as a personal saviour.


Now, you might not want to take my word for it, but how about the word of a saint? Saint Augustine, to be exact. This is what he wrote:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience."

"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn."

"The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men."

"If they find a Christian mistaken in a field in which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?"

"Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."

[Shanna]

Love that quote Shaun.

[[deleted user]]

Uhm. I didn't want to get involved in this conversation again. I have the notifications set to their lowest - since they refuse to go "off".

[[deleted user]]

Xox wrote: "Kendra wrote: "I said fiction. The Bible is not included in that."

Bible is fiction. I read Narnia series by C S Lewis. Hate them. I also hate the Shack."

How do you think the Bible is fiction, anywayÉ

Great, I didn't want to get involved in this again. Me and my big mouth.

[Hazel]

you don't have to hit post, and you can delete posts too.

You keep claiming to want to leave the conversation, and I think Shakespeare said it best "I think the lady doth protest too much"

[[deleted user]]

I did leave. I'm sure you had at least a couple of days without me intervening. But when I came to look - I had too many notifications in my Hotmail inbox to ignore - I saw what you've all been saying.

Delete posts? You mean in my Hotmail inbox? I've done that, but I know from past experience that you're all just "making fun of" the Bible. More!

[Hazel]

we're not making fun of the bible, we're critically evaluating it.

And no, you can make a post here, and then delete it before anyone replies if you actually think twice about wanting to have made the post.

[[deleted user]]

Oh. OK. Yes, I see where it says "delete"

Oh, not making fun of the Bible, huh? You're all being so very critical of it. You have spoken of it as if it's in no way true. It isn't as if every History or Science textbook has all of the facts. It isn't as if you don't have to read "between the lines" of those textbooks from time to time.

In school, not everything is in the textbook. The studen tmust be taught by the teacher> the one who knows. The Bible can be considered a "textbook", in that it teaches us many things. But God also has followers who have studied in His Word extensively, therefore knowing more about it. That's not me, but there is so much information - other tha Evolution or Mormonism or Buddhism - on the Internet. If I can find it, so you can you.

This is a website that I found. Would anyone here who is "brave enough" go and check out the Q&A Forum? I'd really, truly appreciate it.

http://www.everystudent.com/features/...

[Hazel]

Yes, correct, we;ve been very critical of it. Are you suggesting that we shouldn't be? Are you suggesting that we should just accept what it says without thought? If I accepted anything people told me without thought I'd be one messed up little puppy, as most of what people tell you is contradictory.

What you have to understand Kendra, is that we have found that information you're talking about, and the thing about the internet is there is no censorship (or not much) and people can say what they want on here. There are whole websites saying all sorts or bizarre and questionable things. There are people who claim the holocaust never happened, there are people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, there are people who claim that they share a soul with fictional characters from video games ffs (I've seen the forums, its disturbing). All of them need to be critically evaluated to deduce their worth and their veracity. The ones on the bible, that state its inerrant truth are always found wanting by anyone who approaches evaluating it critically, they do not make sound arguments.

We have looked at all this stuff, please don't assume that we haven't. But it is no more convincing than someone telling me that there are fairies at the bottom of the garden.

Again, what we come back to is evidence. There is no evidence for the existence of any of the thousands of deities that have been and are worshipped, and there is no evidence that the bible is anything but stories and oral histories written down by men, and embellished with fairy stories about a god for whom theres no real, reliable evidence.

[[deleted user]]

Oh, but Hazel, I have to argue with you on the last point you made. There is evidence. Lots of evidence - people just simply don't want to swallow it because it's so hard to believe.

But so are all of the other religions that claim things. Do you mean to tell me you are an atheist as well? that's sad, because even if youi do not believe in God, at least if you believe in a god you have some type of "eternal" hope.

[Hazel]

no, you have presented your evidence, and it is all things that we can explain without having to involve god. You show us nature, and we offer the explanations which science has revealed, and the evidence for it, you present personal anecdotes, and though anecdotes are not admissible as evidence, we can also explain the psychological reasons behind much of what people see/hear/feel/hallucinate. And even if it were applicable as evidence, which god is it evidence for? You can't even claim that its evidence for your god.

yes, I'm an atheist, I've told you this before. And don't think its sad, its the best realisation I ever had.

Why do you need eternal hope, thats a ridiculous concept, wasting this life in order to gain a possible further existence for which there is no evidence.

And basically what you just said, is if you don't believe in your god, but believe in a fake one (ie, any god other than yours) then you can have hope, but surely you should be horrified at someone believing in the wrong god, and hoping for something they're not going to get because your god punishes those who don't believe in him.

Again, the fact that you dismiss all those other gods should explain to you why we dismiss yours.

[[deleted user]]

I suppose you're right about that, Hazel. But, let me repeat one thing before I finally get out of this conversation: God is a loving God Who will take anyone and everyone if they accept Him. And they have to be willing to change their lifestyle for Him. I know I did.

[Hazel]

If you say so.

[Shanna]

I'll say it again Kendra don't be a victim of the link, ignore it, don't click on it, ignore and delete emails.
Unless you computer is hijacking you to this page and refusing to leave until you post a comment (if this is the case I suggest you take it to get repaired) you are under no obligation to visit this page and/or comment.

If however you are coming back to supervise and intervene on the "making fun of the bible", I'm sure your God can deal with it and us, and wouldn't require you to stress yourself. No need to be a martyr about it.