You got your vague discussion starter, now run with it.
I don't see why the Bible should be treated any differently than any other work of fiction when it comes to fanfics. 😛
*flees angry mob*
Anne Rice says yes.
Very yes.
Craig Bayfield says no.
VERY no.
the bible is fan fiction. much, if not all, of it was written by fans of god and/or jesus.
Probably going to freeze hades with this remark but. Wot Deck said.
~tobe
also, what craig said. anne rice is mentally hilarious.
Bible is just a book to me. Some believe it is true, some don't. Just like fanfiction. Some fans believe in their own world that their fiction is reality, while others don't see it that way. I don't believe in the bible, but I'm willing to be fair in saying I have no way in knowing if it is indeed factual or not.
Probably going to freeze hades with this remark but. Wot Deck said.
~tobe
Quoted for Truth.
Ok yes it was written by Jesus followers but that means nothing. They recorded what he said and what happened. I think there might have been parts that were fake but I still think that there is a heaven and if an admin is reading my post please delete this topic it's not a discussion but more of a religious war thank you!!
it's a cute little conversation, not a religious war. i can understand if you don't like joking about your religion, but i'm going to guess that the moderators, as well as the community in general, would find it a little silly to forcefully end a topic just because it conflicts with your personal beliefs.
Once upon a time I am Jesus - My Bible Fanfic by Austin age 19
So if I fan-fic the bible am I a profit? You know everything in the bible is real, right?? So I'm psychic.
it's a cute little conversation, not a religious war. i can understand if you don't like joking about your religion, but i'm going to guess that the moderators, as well as the community in general, would find it a little silly to forcefully end a topic just because it conflicts with your personal beliefs.
--------------
It doesent get cute when people start making sack religous jokes, but then again maybe i'm taking this a bit to far. I have an idea!
Wait. An idea?
This now ranks as the stupidest topic I've seen in Marble Garden, ever.
Edit: Well no I can't say that. Nobody has said anything yet. But I anticipate the **** storm.
But in the end. This is what Marble Garden as a whole boils down too. A big heaping pile of it. I guess it better be concentrated here though and that the other places aren't effected!
Or is it affect.....*shoots my grammar*
Arg. don't take anything I say seriously. I just don't like these types of conflicts.
"S***" storms don't happen here. a million people post about expecting one so they can feel like a CNN pundit and then Rico jokes or something. Let me disillusion you all further. JESUS WAS FAT
*blinks* Ok i'll shush.
No no no please come back 
I doubt I have anything trendy to say in this kind of topic. So to not come off sounding like a loon I'll say nothing more!
Wait. An idea?
-------------
Yeah stay the hell away from marble garden.
LOL its turned in to a marsh. all the ruins sank
A marsh of ****!
Don't wander into this swamp!
I came into this topic expecting a serious flame war. I am deeply disappointed now. What am I to do with this cheddar popcorn and lawnchair?
This is hillarious! Last Thursday my friend was relating to me the story of how she found bible fanfics....
Similar to Sonadow, there's Jesus/Judas stories out there.
And now I come in here and find this topic...wow
I came into this topic expecting a serious flame war. I am deeply disappointed now. What am I to do with this cheddar popcorn and lawnchair?
You can gimme the cheddar popcorn for a start. Keep the lawnchair though. Oh, and to stay on topic: I wouldn't mind reading some Bible fanfics someday. Could be immensely entertaining.
I want to see some Satan the Devil, the ruler of Hell bible fanfics made into movies. Since that would be very awesome.
I want to see some Satan the Devil, the ruler of Hell bible fanfics made into movies. Since that would be very awesome.
Yeah dude, no kidding!
Thanks for the support Rishi.
Where'd you find that picture that you've posted up Toby Underwood?
Thanks for the support Rishi.
Anytime, Ma--- uh, I mean Spawn.
It's from one of those talking pictures, laddie! I say, top hole, sah! Called Lucy: Daughter of the Devil if I recall. Spiffing good scoff you know! If it were vittles it would most definitely be a leek and toproot pastie, if I do say so myself! And I do, haha! Wot, wot! Oh look at that you villian, you'd gotten me all peckish with this talk of food. I'll just drag meself to the kitchen for a nip of cordial. *ear wiggle*
Lucy: Daughter of the Devil , huh? I like that name alot, I'm going to look for more information on this picture later.
*Hands a note that says to look up Adult Swim*
Well thanks for the note Hukos, I'm planning on doing just that. Thanks a bunch.
I personally like Commando Jesus myself. 
I personally like Commando Jesus myself.
Never heard of it.
I don't recall having ever read of Commando Jesus, before this thread/topic.
What about Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter?
I came into this topic expecting a serious flame war. I am deeply disappointed now. What am I to do with this cheddar popcorn and lawnchair?
Don't feel too bad. I came into this topic expecting a debate on the validity of books written by prophets of cultish religions that are their own little "add ons" to the Bible.
Now, I want to inform everyone that I don't take the Bible 100% seriously but I do believe there is SOME truth to it, just not all. For example, like the creation story. But many of the old rituals that the Hebrew people were told to do, well, they really did those things, and there really was a Jerusalem and such. Watch Science of the Bible, it's a good series, and it allows you to come to a conclusion yourself about the validity of the Bible. They begin by examining the New Testiment and the Miricles of Jesus.
Now, what I mean by "add ons" are books like the Book of Mormon, or even books that were re-written to suit another religion's beliefs, like Islam and the Koran.
Mormons for example, believe a tribe of Jews crossed over to the Americas centuries before the Birth of Christ, and that they were split into two groups based on their descent. The Lamanites and the Nephites. The Lamanites were cursed and said to have been the primary ancesters of the native americans. The nephites supposedly died out, but genetic tests between jews and native americans have proved the falsehood of said story.
The way it was written, you can TELL it had one primary author, but Mormons claim that different prophets wrote the different books within the Book of Mormon. Also, the only evidence of any magical golden plates were taken from the word of Joseph Smith and his family and buddies.
But I can say this much for Joseph Smith, he was either a genius or a fool because he created at least three different world religions, and suffered a lot of persecution. Of course, wanting to reinstate polygamy into American society wouldn't exactly make him very popular either, especially when he lead an army against the United States government. The battles of the Book of Mormon I was told were actually based on Battles in the Civil war.
So when you think about it, the Book of Mormon could be looked at as a poorly written book of Literature with some basis on the Bible and some Basis on the civil war. Nevertheless, it's little more than a fantasy or tall tale of early American Civilization and nothing more.
You realize that everything you just applied against mormons makes your book of choice look faker than a supermodel's cleavage.... right?
~Rico
Mau, I'm respectfully asking you to stop quoting things that aren't true. The "DNA proof" was done by taking samples from Jews in New York and comparing that to natives of South and Central America. It was a hoax to trick people into believing there was hardcore scientific evidence against the Book of Mormon. There is no way that after generations of intermixing with different peoples that a Jew in NY and Native Americans are going to have much in common genetically speaking.
I've never heard about Joseph Smith leading an army against the US government. I really can't figure out where you came up with that one. But it makes no sense; once the US government asked the LDS church to send men to help during one of the wars of that time, and later the Nauvoo Legion was formed for the defense of Nauvoo, but in neither case was the army mobilized to attack or harm the US government.
And the Book of Mormon was published in 1830 - DECADES before the Civil War.
Please talk with me first if you're going to post more stuff like this - I'd really like to help you avoid embarrassing yourself any further. There are a lot of lies and mistruths about the LDS church out there, and it can be hard to tell the truth apart from the fiction.
You realize that everything you just applied against mormons makes your book of choice look faker than a supermodel's cleavage.... right?
I could acquire sources and citations if you would prefer as evidence for my argument.
Please talk with me first if you're going to post more stuff like this - I'd really like to help you avoid embarrassing yourself any further. There are a lot of lies and mistruths about the LDS church out there, and it can be hard to tell the truth apart from the fiction.
Well you KIND of have me blocked on your IM, Terg. 
I don't see how I'm embarressing myself, either.
...I thought this was the forum you avoided like the plague.
FYI a scholar of the LDS Church even welcomes criticism of the Book of Mormon, so you shouldn't be offended:
Dr. Hugh Nibley of Brigham Young University (who some Mormons feel is one of the greatest scholars in the Church) declares: "The Book of Mormon can and should be tested. It invites criticism." Tenth president Joseph Fielding Smith things that the evidence for it "internally and externally is overwhelming." Original Resource
Mau, I'm respectfully asking you to stop quoting things that aren't true. The "DNA proof" was done by taking samples from Jews in New York and comparing that to natives of South and Central America. It was a hoax to trick people into believing there was hardcore scientific evidence against the Book of Mormon. There is no way that after generations of intermixing with different peoples that a Jew in NY and Native Americans are going to have much in common genetically speaking.
That's not necessarily true either, Terg. DNA evidence points toward the native americans being decended from Asia, not Africa or Europe. (I think Isreal was somewhere in between) Don't believe me? Then ask a Biological anthropoligist. Markers on the Y chromozone and Mitochondrial DNA define different "Haplogroups" that make up the human species, they're the main branches of the human genealogical "family tree." All four american haplogroups bear markers that tie them to Asia.
You quoted Dr. Nibley right, but you're applying ideas that are not facts as "criticism" of the Book of Mormon. It is not criticism to quote outright lies that were, most likely, formed by people who are devoted to attacking the LDS church (anti-Mormons), and therefore are not a reliable and non-biased source to rely on regarding the authenticity of any book, much less a book of scripture. Take this quote from Hugh Nibley:
"The normal way of dealing with the Book of Mormon 'scientifically' has been first to attribute to the Book of Mormon something it did not say, and then to refute the claim by scientific statements that have not been proven." - Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1988), 214. The first edition appeared in 1967.
I don't know about this haplogroup stuff, but the whole idea behind this does not prove the Book of Mormon wrong. The Book of Mormon doesn't claim the specific genetic lineage of the Nephites and Lamanites, beyond what is stated about them being descended from Joseph through Manasseh (meaning that they aren't strictly Jews in the sense that they are descended from Joseph rather than Judah, "Jew" being a term derived from Judah). There were even other peoples brought to the Americas at certain times in the Nephites history, and certainly it is possible after the recorded history as well (the Nephite record ends in 421 AD). Unless these biological anthropologists were able to find the remains of a certified Nephite or Lamanite and check their DNA samples, then there isn't any actual proof relating to the validity of the Book of Mormon. This is really just grasping at straws; I saw the original documentary done by the anti-Mormons who did the scientific testing behind this, which was unscientific and meant to be a way to attack the LDS church.
If you're going to criticize the Book of Mormon, actually criticize what is in it, not what people claim they know about it. And that means you have to read it for yourself. 
EDIT: Guess what? I found a website that has loads of proof against this DNA "proof" you're quoting. It validates what I have said above. Here are the links:
FARMS link page to topics on "DNA Book of Mormon"
DNA and the Book of Mormon - a presentation done in August 2008 by John M. Butler, PhD
So uh, yeah. Whatever source you got your information from is probably the same source that these guys are refuting, judging by the fact that I heard about this DNA thing back in 2003 on my mission, and this article was as recent as this last summer.
Again, talk to me about these things first (I've blocked you on IMs, but not e-mail), or at least check what your "sources" are saying. The fact that you didn't catch the Civil War thing shows you aren't looking at these critically, and that really hurts your credibility.
Evidence, Mau? All religion is fiction. No religion is 100% real. The point of faith is to reject science. The point of faith is the give the people with no hope from a logical standpoint, hope from an illogical one. Sources and citations are a waste of time. I can register a .org and write papers on it to provide as counter points if you want. Just say what it is you found in your own words, because they are not going to mean any more coming from some other schmuck on the internet. Or is it that it doesn't sound convincing unless it's a quote from the third party site? Or maybe that you need to copy paste links because you don't fully understand the paper yourself. In either case your point would be discarded for either not making sense or not being coherent.
I look around the forums and see you doing nothing different. You are still trying to get us to let you discuss sexuality in cartoon animals and bash your friggin' ex. Stop it and let it go or I'll invoke the sentience rule. Did you get banned from all the other boards or something?
~Rico
