Too Fictionized?

[Melchi Asuma]

Adding to the Bible stories makes it fictionalized no matter how feasible the additions sound. This is mainly because the addituons are simply conjencture.

[Jyockel08]

I think the fictionalization has piqued my interest in reading this book now. It adds a pretty fascinating element. Thank you!

[Lisa A Rayburn]

Adding to the Bible stories makes it fictionalized no matter how feasible the additions sound. This is mainly because the addituons are simply conjencture.

That is my view, as well. I grant that the additions have made the stories more understandable and, to some, answered questions they have had for many years, but in the end, it remains, as you said mere conjecture. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts!

[Lisa A Rayburn]

I think the fictionalization has piqued my interest in reading this book now. It adds a pretty fascinating element. Thank you!

I grant that it adds another element to stories that have had "holes" in them for centuries. It's interesting to see where the author took things. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts!

[DonnaKay]

I don't think it's too fictionized. Filling the gaps in Bible stories creates an interesting view of those stories.

[Lisa A Rayburn]

I don't think it's too fictionized. Filling the gaps in Bible stories creates an interesting view of those stories.

I agree. That's a unique way of phrasing it: "...creates an interesting view of those stories." Did you feel that the inserted parts changed the stories away from the view presented in the Bible?

[mensah2]

The stories are not fictionalized because there is an element of successssion. That is, There are previous professies that is fulfilled in every story. I mean most of the stories are written based on fulfilled prophesies.

[Akpome1]

Not at all! Your second thought is what I support. To help people understand these passages you said were simply glossed over, such fiction is very necessary.

[Lisa A Rayburn]

The stories are not fictionalized because there is an element of succession. That is, There are previous professies that is fulfilled in every story. I mean most of the stories are written based on fulfilled prophesies.

I understand. I did not mean the stories themselves were fiction, only the parts that the author added (apparently) to aid in comprehending them. I hope I've cleared up any confusion you may have had. Please let me know if I need to explain further. Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us!

[Lisa A Rayburn]

Not at all! Your second thought is what I support. To help people understand these passages you said were simply glossed over, such fiction is very necessary.

I'm so happy you agree! I was somewhat concerned that some would think the author had taken too much liberty with the stories he highlighted. The consensus seems to be that he added just the right amount to help people understand without taking anything away from the story itself. Thanks so much for stopping by and commenting!

[maxiphemmax]

I do not think the author over emphasized the true picture of the bibblical stories. Most of these stories when writen down sometimes do not really portray all the total pictures of how it happenned. Therefore, having an author with more information to fill the gap is sometimes cool, and it being so related to the biblical precedence makes it more cool.

[Nym182]

I am sure that "feeling" will be dependant on who is reading it... Some people like just the facts and some people either need or appreciate metaphors and fictionalizing to give a different pov of a story.

[DaeReads19]

I think this book is supposed to be less of a study guide, and far more an open interpretation on the actions of humans long ago. There may have been thousands of years between us and the first people, yet motives, desires, and human flesh remain the same. People still commit acts of rage in jealous fits, and sadly some siblings still kill their relatives. People have grown to understand more and more of the world, but fundamentally deep down we are still the same. I think that's the only realism this book truly needs; the rest is creative inspiration meant to entertain us and get us thinking.

[Lisa A Rayburn]

I do not think the author over emphasized the true picture of the bibblical stories. Most of these stories when writen down sometimes do not really portray all the total pictures of how it happenned. Therefore, having an author with more information to fill the gap is sometimes cool, and it being so related to the biblical precedence makes it more cool.

I completely agree that many of the stories, as originally written, definitely do not give us the full picture. That's actually one of the first problems I had with the Bible as a child. There just seemed to be so much missing, so many 'plot holes' if you will. I do recognize that what the author has added helps to fill in the gaps and even aid in comprehension, and he did well in keeping to the original meanings of the stories. Thanks so much for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!!.

[Lisa A Rayburn]

I am sure that "feeling" will be dependant on who is reading it... Some people like just the facts and some people either need or appreciate metaphors and fictionalizing to give a different pov of a story.

Very true! I suppose the stories as originally written could be considered "just the facts," I never really thought about it that way. It seems you've provided me with a different pov as well! Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!