Do you portray the Bible in your fantasy novels? Do you have your own sort of Bible according to the fantasy religion (if there is a religion at all)? Do you think it's okay to portray the Bible in fantasy novels or would you rather leave it out?

I'll usually have something that symbolizes the Bible, whether it be an actual book or scrolls (the most obvious ones I use) or something that contains the laws of my allegorical God-like beings.

In two of my books I have a book or scrolls, usually I don't call them Bibles... I haven't come up with the names for them right now, but one of them I just call "The Ancient Scrolls" Which is slightly boring, but I'm too lazy to call them anything else. Right now I'm calling the other one "Shaddaih's Word" or... Something like that... Can't remember.

In my world based off of music, though, I have sheet music. Well, something like that. I have the music of a certain amount of songs that are the Bible. There are thousands upon thousands of songs and it's nearly impossible to memorize all of them, but all of them hold the laws of Shaddaih and great musicians-Er scholars, study them.... I'm still working on if the lyrics contain the laws or if it's just instrumentals and the instrumentals form words in the air for the time the song is played...

But anyways, in most if not all of my books I have something that symbolizes the Bible. Even if it doesn't play the largest role in the story, it is there and my characters refer to it sometimes.

Bethany Faith

Eh, I have the Histories which which is a verbal collection of the histories. Then I think there are sort of a Ten Commandments; except unwritten.

I don't know, I don't write allegory.

Yes.

No... I just use the one we have. Or is that "yes"?

Yes, definitely. The Bible is powerful, and if one is trying to be evangelistic, use it! Use it! Use it! And, even if you're not, use it!

I did an evangelistic campaign for a video game that used the Bible (fantasy), and it turned out pretty good...
God bless,
Crushmaster.

I call the Bible the Logos (stole that from Willow Wenial ), and it's the actual Bible, without alterations. Faer Latef is the non-inspired book written by prophets of old that has some more specific Enderion info.

eru

Only one culture currently keeps the Word, and they pass it down verbally. There is a single recorded copy of the stories and the teachings, and they were copied down by a visitor to the halfelven. I definitely think it's okay, as long as you don't add anything that isn't there.

Well...it's definitely "all right." Beyond all right, in fact, to use the Bible in a fantasy you're writing.

However, at the same time, we must be very, very, very wary of adding things or misinterpreting ideas in Scripture. There's a fine line between allegory and misinterpretation, and if we choose to write using direct allegory or Bible passages, we have the responsibility to be careful about the truth of God's Word.

And then at the other extreme, I believe it's perfectly acceptable not to directly quote the Bible in your fantasy story. Much depends on what is universal truth in your story. Which merits its own thread, of course. So at the moment this paragraph may be considered purely opinion .

In my story, I have a Creator who indirectly oversees the world through peacekeeping elemental spirits called Verai (I love that name!!). Thus, I have these verai speaking the truth, without having an actual Bible.

Hope that's semi-helpful!

@Evenstar: I see what you mean. There's also the middle ground, like me, where there is a Bible but things aren't directly quoted.

eru

I totally agree, Dawn. We have to be careful, when using the Bible, that we do not add to it.

In Murel not many parts of the "Bible" have been written so far and what does exist hasn't been compiled together.
It has been written mostly by the elves (since they represent Israel) but a little has been written by the humans and dwarfs as well.

I don't want to make up my own Bible though. Most of what I quote from the writings will be from our Bible. Anything that isn't from our Bible would be historical in nature.

I am uncertain what I think about using the Bible in fantasy. I remember when my mom read at least a couple of the Dragons in our Midst books, she told me she was uncomfortable with having Christianity and very fantasy elements in the same book, because she felt it made it seem like Christianity itself was fantasy. I think she has a good point, although like I said, I haven't completely made up my mind about what I think.

Also, when I run across direct (or even clearly paraphrased) Scripture quotations in fantasy when it doesn't take place in our world (or doesn't have a clear, obvious connection to our world), I tend to roll my eyes. It might just be that I'm a little cynical, but I find it hard to take seriously. If it's not our world, how did they get it? If the story gives me a reason to believe it makes sense, it might not bug me as much...dunno.

*nods* I agree. It has to make sense.
Still, I will try to stay as close to the Bible as I can.

I am not really sure if I like the use of the Bible in fantasy. I read a fantasy book once where there was a one god named Arman, and he had a Book Of Life (the Bible) I don't really know, but I guess I just felt uncomfortable that the author was using scriptures from the Bible as the words of the one god Arman. In my one fantasy book that I'm starting, there is a creator god who made everything, but I don't intend on using the Bible as the word this creator god wrote. It just feels wrong, somehow.

Anyway, that was my 2 cents. Probably not very helpful, but I thought I would mention it anyway.

For personal convictions, I will not put the Bible in a fantasy world. As my mother says, the Bible was given to the sons of Adam on this earth only. So in Erde, my fantasy universe, there is no Bible, nor do I have an allegorical equivalent. However, I can quote Scripture in chapter headings, and my MC comes from our world, so he keeps his Christianity in mind. Essentially, he interprets everything he experiences with a Biblical worldview. It's quite fun. It allows me to have a Christian worldview without bringing the religion into a fantasy world.

When my fantasy exists in this earth, however, like Peter's Angel, I can have the Bible full strength. 'Tis fun. That's one of the benefits of Ruritanian novels.

Ok. I understand what you're saying Philli, but in a fully developed world there has to be something to take the Bible's place.
What could take its place?

Maybe it isn't always necessary to have a Bible per se; the reason for the story being to bring out values, truths, and morals the Bible teaches, rather than using the actual Bible itself.

True.

But take Murel for example (*rolls eyes at self*), when it's done (if it ever is done) I'll want a complete history from creation to judgement. What then?

So... are you saying you need something in Murel to be the Bible? The point I was making is that although it can be enhancing to have a Bible portrayed in your fantasy world, not all fantasy worlds need it to be there in a tactile way if the story is enforcing the messages it upholds.

I believe using the Bible is very important, as "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17).

It has power our words do not.
God bless,
Crushmaster.

@Twinnie *nods* I know understand what you're saying and I agree.

@Crush I also understand what you're saying but half-agree with you. There is no reason why our words can't have the same power as the Bible. Just as the writers of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit, so can we (along with our words) if the Holy Spirit inspires our thoughts, minds, and pens.

That's not an accurate comparison. The word translated "inspired" in 2 Timothy 3:16 means "God-breathed." God literally "breathed out" the words of Scripture.

There is absolutely no comparison between His words and ours. We might can speak things God wants us to speak, but they aren't literally "from", directly "from" God, as the canon of Scripture is closed. God's Word is special, because it wasn't just from man (even godly men) - it was, literally, completely, from God. Hence why it is infallible, it is blessed, and it is our source of authority for all matters of faith and doctrine, and our life.

Faith cannot come from man - it must come from God, ultimately. Hence why, for example, Christ said: "Sanctify them through Your truth; Your word is truth" (John 17:17, I believe). And, in Psalms 119 (?), Scripture records, "The law of God is perfect, converting the soul."

Do you see what I'm saying? I can expand if you'd like.
God bless,
Crushmaster.

Ok, here is where I semi-agree with both of you. Crush, you're right. The Word of God is powerful, and in real life, yes: it can do miraculous things. However, I agree completely with Sui when he says that our words are also powerful. This is a belief I hold to very strongly. (though I will by no means be forceful about it) However, before I post my full reply, I may just go and write up a thread for this, because we are deviating from topic.

New thread here: viewtopic.php?f=32&t=4436

Good discussion on this thread... *will have to think on this a lot*

After thinking through this I finally realized what you all were saying.

Our words do have power and our words can have God-inspired truth, but they cannot ever be used as a "Bible" because they are not the Bible. The Bible is the only basis of absolute truth and it would be wrong to make out our own words as such.

Now that I realize my mistake, I'm not going to be using the Bible or any other form of it in Murel.

*nods* I get what you're saying, Sui. I hadn't been thinking of it in that way, good point.

Umm...Why not?
God bless,
Crushmaster.

I won't be using the Bible because it wouldn't make sense to have Earth's Bible in Murel. Earth and Murel are not only two different places, but when one exists the other does not and vice versa.
Think of it this way: it would look really weird if Coca Cola was also in Murel. It's the same thing.

Why wouldn't it make sense?

We have humans look the same, act the same...Mountains are still mountains...Trees are still trees...Murder is still wrong...Et cetera.

Having something in both places does not negate one or the other.
God bless,
Crushmaster.

I think I understand what Suiauthon means. The Bible is written in earth, not only in earth, but in specific nations on earth, by specific people on earth, and if it was written any other way it would not be the Bible.

Some people have things from earth in their Otherworlds, C. S. Lewis had portals between earth and Narnia, Tolkien had english (called the Common Tongue) in Middle Earth. But otherwise Fantasy authors take abstract ideas from earth rather than actual things.

For instance there are usually people, but there may not be people from earth. A person could write a story where the Apostle Peter finds a portal to an Otherworld, or a story where a fictional character born in earth goes to an Otherworld (like Peter Pevensie), or a fictional character born in an Otherworld who has never heard of earth (like Sam Gamgee, though he has an English name). Likewise an author may have books, just as in earth, but not books from earth, such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, or the Bible. If they did include books from earth it would suggest some kind of portal-like connection.

Very interesting thoughts... *is watching this topic*

Tsahraf has just explained my reasoning much better than I ever could.

Yes, I see what you're saying (doesn't mean I agree, though). Please bear with me as I attempt to better convey what I'm attempting to say (if anything is unclear, forgive me, and please ask for clarification).

We're in a completely different universe. That is true. But wouldn't that universe still be controlled by the same God? Where does morality come from? Is murder wrong? Why? From whom does it come from?

Are men sinners? Do they need to be saved? By Whom? Is the Way different? Does evangelism exist? Et cetera, et cetera. Basically: how much can be different?

For example: I wrote a campaign for a fantasy computer game, whose purpose was evangelism. I had no problem putting direct Scripture quotes in it. After all, we're writing for people in this world. And even though our fantasy worlds may be somewhat different, they're really quite similar. They're "framed" the same, even if the painting is somewhat different.

And I doubt any of that made sense (or was loaded with logical fallacies - or both), but I hope at least one sentence or so did...
God bless,
Joel ><>.

A thought I had is that, while a world needs guiding words from its Creator, what form those words are in will vary depending on how advanced the culture is. A world without writing will spread the words by talking, while a world with primitive writing will have scrolls, and a more advanced world will have an actual book. This book could simply contain moral and spiritual laws that are immutable, with some fantasy twists. There is also the possibility of having a fantasy method of holding the words other than a book... And keep in mind the differences such a book would have if it was before or after the coming of the Savior of the world.

@Crush
*nods* But almost all of the Old-Testament wouldn't work for a fantasy world. There are spiritual truths in those scriptures in the Old-Testament, but it is written in the context of history. History that probably won't take place in our world. That takes a huge chunk out of the Bible right there.

@Jonathan
Good thought. And how often do we have to quote the Bible word for word? Do we have to at all? The 'book' (if it's even that) doesn't have to be quoted word for word. In many cases we could just paraphrase the book into the spiritual truths that are immutable throughout all worlds.

Hopefully some of that made sense.

Something else to keep in mind, guys, is that not every fantasy story directly lays out the salvation road. That doesn't make the story less powerful. Having the Bible in a fantasy piece could improve the story, but does not, always.

That is extremely interesting. I think, with God's grace, you could say a powerful message with that premise.

I don't think it has to be word for word. Perhaps it could be thought of like translating it into another language, only instead we're translating truths from it into another world.


Well said.

Really good thoughts, Ines.

Jesus IS the Word. If we are faithful to His teachings and proclaim them with truth and conviction throughout our fantasy and sci-fi worlds, then we ARE using the Bible. We must be ever so careful to make sure that what we are teaching is lined up with the Scriptures, but that doesn't mean we have to quote directly.

You can, of course. In my sister's fantasy about ants, she has the mentor quote Proverbs multiple times, simply stating that it's "wisdom from the Book" She doesn't go into what the book is. I love how she did that.

I don't think it has to be a direct quote to be His Word. We are to teach all nations all things whatsoever He has commanded. Sometimes that will mean quoting the words of Scripture, and sometimes it will mean sharing the Truths of Scripture.

I would add that you can do just as much damage if not more by using the words Scripture in the wrong way than by leaving them out entirely.

My two dollars. This is something I've given a lot of prayer, thought and study to.

(waits for Twin to try to crush her...)

Not to get off topic, but that sounds AWESOME!

*scurries out *

Hm, very interesting discussion y'all. I think in this facet of things I'm inclined to weigh in with Tsahraf and Sui. Joel, what we are using as the basis for not using the Bible is that it would be out of historical context. We're not denying that the Bible's truths don't hold true in the fantasy worlds, only that the Bible would not make sense in a world outside of earth because of how much historical context there is (Particularly the OT, but you can't take one half of the Bible and leave the rest; it's all or nothing).

That being said, what Inesdar wrote *digs for quote*

This strikes me as one of the most interesting approaches on this entire thread - it just opens up an entire new dimension to things.

Anyways, just my 0.02

eru

That's what came to my mind as well.

*agrees with what everyone else has been saying*

Thank you Crushmaster, you were clear, and, as far as I can see, unfalllacied.
Yes, the same truths hold in a fantasy exactly as in real life.

Here is a pretty simple categorization of the different ways scripture is present in an Otherworld.

(If I miss something you can point it out)

1
Absent:
Every one in the Otherworld is in the position of Job, or, say, the modern people in Asia who have not heard and will never hear any part of the Bible.

2
Partially Present:
That would be where a portal was opened to the Ancient World and only some of the earlier books of the Bible made it through.

3
Fully Present:
(what Inesdar is apparently using)
That would be as if Peter was carrying a KJV Bible in his pocket when he went to Narnia.

4
Present in Author:
(the one I picked)
The Bible is fully present, but not as a book; rather as a part of the innate conscience of every creature.
Thus Gandalf would know that adultery is evil, not because he read it in the Bible, or because he knew (as Job knew) that it is against the Natural Order that God set up when he created the world, but rather because Tolkien knew it was wrong from the Bible.


Translating the KJV Bible into an invented language would be a great way, perhaps the best way, to develop the language.

I really like this discussion. The posts have been pertinent, thoughtful, and interesting.

A lot of wonderful, thoughtful posts in this thread. My personal preference is #4 from Tsahraf's list, and Tolkien was my inspiration for using this method. I was awed with how he conveyed a very obviously Christian sense of morality in Fellowship of the Ring without referencing religion directly, real or created. Gandalf might as well have gotten out a Bible and hit Frodo over the head with it, the Christian overtones were so obvious.

Yep, yep, yep, I'm a number 4, too.

Just... without the death warrant on my head. (only Elanor will probably find that funny....)

I s'pose I'd be #4 as well, though I've recently transitioned from an unexplained Bible that is complete in Enderion.

I'm not sure where an OT point-of-view novel would fit in, but I'm guessing 4.

eru

I am glad Inesdar is doing 3, since it seems everyone else is picking 4. And yes, it would be impossible to evangelize with 4, since the basic idea of 4 is that anything you would tell them they would already know.

A note about 4: the rites of Christianity (after Christ), such as foot washing and baptism, would also be present in the author, rather than physically present in the world.

One of the differences between 1 and 4 is that in 1 there would be High Places and patriarchal sacrifices (as Job did), but in 4, prayer and hymns and gathering with other Faithful would be the only forms of worship.

Only 1 and 4 could be used for an Independent World, since the other two require connection with earth.

Ah, in that case I think my book falls under 1 then.

eru

A note about 4 from someone who frequently uses that approach... I can't speak for everyone that writes with that method, but as I'm familiar with it, books that use that approach do not have any religious expression at all. There is no prayer, forms of worship, or references made to deity. So in my books that follow that method, there isn't any hymn-singing, communion, or the like. Rather, the focus is on the morals - the lifestyle and integrity. This works very well for many stories that have a primary or secondary purpose of expounding on a moral principle such as honesty, murder, etc. You're teaching by how your character defines right and wrong (particularly, how they arc between those two points), and the moral base is intrinsic to the world/character rather than coming from a defined source.

I'm probably 1 as well...