Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 22:02:43 GMT
Benziger, I'm going to send you the epub and you can see if it makes sense to translate into German. You would need Adobe Digital Editions (free) to view it. You probably already know that, but just in case.
Going to see if I can attach here in Messages, otherwise it will have to be by email.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 22:05:19 GMT
No option to attach here. I will send tmr morning by email if that's ok.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 4:28:48 GMT
Maggie, If you remember I gave a good review for "Daddy who's that Man". However I made one small suggestion that maybe one line should be edited. I was suggesting only a handful of Jews wanted Jesus Killed not all Jews. I do think if one writes about this period in history one can condemn a whole nation to anti-seminism as John did in the New Testament. For many, many years the Christions on the Continent hated the Jews. Jewish people have faced hatred and persecution for centuries - culminating in the murder of six million in the Holocaust. (There is no basis in the scripture for the argument that the Jewish people were responsible for the death of Jesus Christ. That's the declaration made by Pope Benedict the sixteenth.)
"In the Gospel of John, the word Ἰουδαῖοι, the Jews, is used 63 times, of which it is used in a hostile sense 31 times, and no distinctions are made between Jewish groups, who are all lumped together. The Sadducees, for example, prominent elsewhere, are not distinguished. The enemies of Jesus are described collectively as "the Jews", in contradistinction to the other evangelists, who do not generally ascribe to "the Jews" collectively calls for the death of Jesus. In the other three texts, the plot to put Jesus to death is always presented as coming from a small group of priests and rulers, the Sadducees. The Gospel of John has provided antisemites with grist for their mill. It is the primary source of the image of "the Jews" acting collectively as the enemy of Jesus, which later became fixed in Christian minds.(Wikipedia)"
I was pointing this out even though I praised the book.(Ron did a brilliant cover for their book) I really feel it's important to emphasize that the Romans killed Jesus, particularly in books for children. (The Jewish form of death was stoning) However The Jesus Ninja took offence at my words. (I wrote to him and tried to explain my position but he never replied) I don't know if you write about the crucifixtion Maggie but I will construct my words carefully for your review and send it to you first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 11:36:30 GMT
Maggie, If you remember I gave a good review for "Daddy who's that Man". However I made one small suggestion that maybe one line should be edited. I was suggesting only a handful of Jews wanted Jesus Killed not all Jews. I do think if one writes about this period in history one can condemn a whole nation to anti-seminism as John did in the New Testament. For many, many years the Christions on the Continent hated the Jews. Jewish people have faced hatred and persecution for centuries - culminating in the murder of six million in the Holocaust. (There is no basis in the scripture for the argument that the Jewish people were responsible for the death of Jesus Christ. That's the declaration made by Pope Benedict the sixteenth.) "In the Gospel of John, the word Ἰουδαῖοι, the Jews, is used 63 times, of which it is used in a hostile sense 31 times, and no distinctions are made between Jewish groups, who are all lumped together. The Sadducees, for example, prominent elsewhere, are not distinguished. The enemies of Jesus are described collectively as "the Jews", in contradistinction to the other evangelists, who do not generally ascribe to "the Jews" collectively calls for the death of Jesus. In the other three texts, the plot to put Jesus to death is always presented as coming from a small group of priests and rulers, the Sadducees. The Gospel of John has provided antisemites with grist for their mill. It is the primary source of the image of "the Jews" acting collectively as the enemy of Jesus, which later became fixed in Christian minds.(Wikipedia)" I was pointing this out even though I praised the book.(Ron did a brilliant cover for their book) I really feel it's important to emphasize that the Romans killed Jesus, particularly in books for children. (The Jewish form of death was stoning) However The Jesus Ninja took offence at my words. (I wrote to him and tried to explain my position but he never replied) I don't know if you write about the crucifixtion Maggie but I will construct my words carefully for your review and send it to you first. Larika, mine is a cute little funny book about a boy who imagines Jesus coming to help him out with a bullying situation. That's all. No Jews, no bibles, no mention of Christians. Just the boy and his friends and Jesus. As for Skoob's and JesusNinja's book, I felt sorry for them when you gave them a three star review. It broke my heart because I know what that one review can do when there are so few others. But please, let me give you your money back for the ebook purchase because you seem irritated with Christian themes and this is ultimately a Christian book, for people who love Jesus, as a God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 11:40:29 GMT
I also know how they killed themselves to produce this book, how Ron Miller did them a huge favour by making the cover, how they spent hours and hours proofing, and collaborating and how it was close to their hearts, only to have a colleague take them down. If it had been a stranger I might not have felt so much pain for them. So let us please drop the subject of my book and JesusNinja's and Skoob's book.
You can request a refund from Amazon. If they do not give it to you, I will.
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Feb 3, 2020 14:01:07 GMT
In truth, regardless of the topic, genre or subject, the time and effort put into a book really shouldn't count towards whether one looks at it favorably or unfavorably. Pretty much everyone throws themselves heart and soul into their book and just for that reason it shouldn't be a factor in judging the results. Ed Wood worked as hard and believed just as deeply in what he was doing when he made Plan 9 from Outer Space as Orson Welles did when he made Citizen Kane. A book, like any other creative project, has to stand or fall on its merits, not the effort put into it. I certainly would be miffed if someone were to dismiss one of my paintings because they thought it came easily to me. One person may fall in love with a book while another may not be quite so enamored. And it may not be---and probably rarely is---as black and white as that. Someone may find great merit in a book, and enjoy it, but still say "If only..." I have read books that I have loved and have read and re-read but wished had been written a little differently or with which I didn't agree with everything said, just as I have read books I thought were written brilliantly but where I disagreed with every single idea---right down to its basic premise. I have had my own books receive glowing reviews...and had books that have received scathing ones...but I put the same time and effort into each. Sometimes I hit, sometimes I miss, sometimes the reviewer is dead right about something I could have done better (it is almost guaranteed that someone will zero in on the one mistake I made) and sometimes I think they are dead wrong. But no one is obligated to like one of my books just because I worked hard on it. I think it should be taken for granted that anyone who has had a book published did that.*
------------- *Although I can certainly think of more than one exception!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 14:15:39 GMT
To be honest Maggie i didn't think 3 stars was that bad. I don't want any money back for your book. I am NOT anti-Christian just pointing out that over the centuries mistakes were made (as in John's gospel) I think it best if I don't write a review of your book as you seem to think my review of their book was so bad. I don't. Here it is
I enjoyed reading this novel for children. It's the story of Jesus leading up to his death on the cross,as seen through the eyes of a young Jewish boy. I think that most young Christian readers will love this book. The language is right at their level and the research for the Jewish Pesach is spot on for that period. The characters too are well defined and youngsters will get an idea of what life was like during the time of Jesus. A well written book for Christian children. There is one criticism I would make. I am taking a course on mis-translations in the gospels.According to the Gospels, most Jews – and most Judeans – strongly supported Jesus/Yeshua of Nazareth, while a tiny minority wanted him killed. Losing sight of this fact, later editors and translators often produced texts that made readers think instead that the entire Jewish people had murdered this “powerful prophet” (Luke 24:19). The claim that “the Jews killed Christ” then fed into anti Jewish hatred and violence across the globe for many centuries. In this day and age, many traditional translations and theologies are slowly being corrected. The line should read, "Only some people in Judea wanted Jesus Killed." Perhaps a slight editing in your book might be helpful.
Honesty in reviews is important without being cruel.I thought I was making a helpful suggestion. Anyway better to let it rest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 14:22:06 GMT
PS. Also my daughter-in-law and my Grandchild are Christians. I even give money to my Grandchild every month as she is collecting money so that their community can build a Church. However you are right, I am no longer a Christian but I am a humanist type. I don't belong to any organization. I keep an open mind and would never speak out against any religion or belief system. Maggie I am very disappointed in what you have written. I thought i knew you but clearly I don't. Skoob was brilliant by the way and seemed to understand what I was saying.
Benziger I didn't think this would escalate as it seems to have done. So sorry. I thought I was writing about reviews. Bye for a while.
|
|
|
Post by Retread-Retired-Cameron on Feb 3, 2020 14:32:03 GMT
The star rating system is a way for readers to let others know how much the liked a book, and the accompanying verbiage allows the reader leaving the rating to express what they did or did not like about the work in question.
On Amazon I have two 4-star reviews for "Regeneration: Gina's Journey". One review starts out "Engaging but simplistic". The other review starts out "An unusual and entertaining sf story". Both readers listed what they liked or found wanting, which is what any author [professional or amateur] should hope for.
To be honest, it would be nice to have a collection of ratings including 1 to 3 stars, though I'm not foolish enough to hold my breath waiting for them or a 5-star.
The point is a range of ratings [good, bad, indifferent, and / or glowing] lets potential readers get a better idea of whether the book in question is one they'll be interested in. If someone likes my work, great. If someone dislikes my work, again great, because at least the person who found fault read it and said 'nope, not a keeper'.
When all is said and done if everyone had the exact same interests and tastes then there would be nothing for writers to write about. On that happy note time to get back into the underbrush.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 16:31:58 GMT
The star rating system is a way for readers to let others know how much the liked a book, and the accompanying verbiage allows the reader leaving the rating to express what they did or did not like about the work in question. On Amazon I have two 4-star reviews for "Regeneration: Gina's Journey". One review starts out "Engaging but simplistic". The other review starts out "An unusual and entertaining sf story". Both readers listed what they liked or found wanting, which is what any author [professional or amateur] should hope for. To be honest, it would be nice to have a collection of ratings including 1 to 3 stars, though I'm not foolish enough to hold my breath waiting for them or a 5-star. The point is a range of ratings [good, bad, indifferent, and / or glowing] lets potential readers get a better idea of whether the book in question is one they'll be interested in. If someone likes my work, great. If someone dislikes my work, again great, because at least the person who found fault read it and said 'nope, not a keeper'. When all is said and done if everyone had the exact same interests and tastes then there would be nothing for writers to write about. On that happy note time to get back into the underbrush. I give good reviews unless there is a real, real, real reason to give anything less.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 16:38:00 GMT
In truth, regardless of the topic, genre or subject, the time and effort put into a book really shouldn't count towards whether one looks at it favorably or unfavorably. Pretty much everyone throws themselves heart and soul into their book and just for that reason it shouldn't be a factor in judging the results. Ed Wood worked as hard and believed just as deeply in what he was doing when he made Plan 9 from Outer Space as Orson Welles did when he made Citizen Kane. A book, like any other creative project, has to stand or fall on its merits, not the effort put into it. I certainly would be miffed if someone were to dismiss one of my paintings because they thought it came easily to me. One person may fall in love with a book while another may not be quite so enamored. And it may not be---and probably rarely is---as black and white as that. Someone may find great merit in a book, and enjoy it, but still say "If only..." I have read books that I have loved and have read and re-read but wished had been written a little differently or with which I didn't agree with everything said, just as I have read books I thought were written brilliantly but where I disagreed with every single idea---right down to its basic premise. I have had my own books receive glowing reviews...and had books that have received scathing ones...but I put the same time and effort into each. Sometimes I hit, sometimes I miss, sometimes the reviewer is dead right about something I could have done better (it is almost guaranteed that someone will zero in on the one mistake I made) and sometimes I think they are dead wrong. But no one is obligated to like one of my books just because I worked hard on it. I think it should be taken for granted that anyone who has had a book published did that.* ------------- *Although I can certainly think of more than one exception! Ron, if someone proclaims themselves a non-believer and they go out seeking Christian books I am then under the impression that there is an agenda and it is not an unbiased review. Why does an atheist or humanist buy Christian books? They are already prejudiced and looking for things to criticize. Just leave the books alone.
I am all for fair, but to go into it with a purpose to find fault, that is disturbing.
I don't believe in chairs, I am not into them or particularly fond of them. Why would buy books about chairs? or keep bringing up chairs in a forum, with the Make of the chair stated publicly again? Was one bad review not enough?
Come on.
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Feb 3, 2020 17:01:32 GMT
In truth, regardless of the topic, genre or subject, the time and effort put into a book really shouldn't count towards whether one looks at it favorably or unfavorably. Pretty much everyone throws themselves heart and soul into their book and just for that reason it shouldn't be a factor in judging the results. Ed Wood worked as hard and believed just as deeply in what he was doing when he made Plan 9 from Outer Space as Orson Welles did when he made Citizen Kane. A book, like any other creative project, has to stand or fall on its merits, not the effort put into it. I certainly would be miffed if someone were to dismiss one of my paintings because they thought it came easily to me. One person may fall in love with a book while another may not be quite so enamored. And it may not be---and probably rarely is---as black and white as that. Someone may find great merit in a book, and enjoy it, but still say "If only..." I have read books that I have loved and have read and re-read but wished had been written a little differently or with which I didn't agree with everything said, just as I have read books I thought were written brilliantly but where I disagreed with every single idea---right down to its basic premise. I have had my own books receive glowing reviews...and had books that have received scathing ones...but I put the same time and effort into each. Sometimes I hit, sometimes I miss, sometimes the reviewer is dead right about something I could have done better (it is almost guaranteed that someone will zero in on the one mistake I made) and sometimes I think they are dead wrong. But no one is obligated to like one of my books just because I worked hard on it. I think it should be taken for granted that anyone who has had a book published did that.* ------------- *Although I can certainly think of more than one exception! Ron, if someone proclaims themselves a non-believer and they go out seeking Christian books I am then under the impression that there is an agenda and it is not an unbiased review. Why does an atheist or humanist buy Christian books? They are already prejudiced and looking for things to criticize. Just leave the books alone.
That may itself be reflecting a prejudice. I am an agnostic (which is very different from being an atheist!). I have an entire shelf full of books on religion. Most of these are on Christianity but there are books on other faiths as well. I don't think that a non-believer or an atheist would necessarily only be interested in a book about Christianity in order to belittle or scoff at it (though I am in no doubt that some do). I certainly don't do that. Christianity, both as a faith and philosophy, is a fascinating subject...and one that has been immensely important in the history of the past two millennia. And it is difficult to deny that there is much of value even if one doesn't accept the supernatural element (exactly as Thomas Jefferson did when he created his redacted "Jefferson Bible"). One certainly doesn't have to be a believer to study Christianity, any more than a Christian should avoid, say, studying Islam, Buddhism or Judaism. There is much to be learned from those faiths as well and I am sure that I would be in the wrong to assume that a Christian would buy a book on Hinduism solely in order to write a critical or condescending review. For myself, I had no problem at all in not only doing the cover for "Daddy, Who Is That Man?" but in also making sure I did something that was faithful to the idea and message the book was trying to convey. For one thing, I respect the author and I respect his faith regardless of what my own feelings may be.
I am all for fair, but to go into it with a purpose to find fault, that is disturbing.
I am all too sure there are non-believers who take a perverse delight in baiting Christians (or people of any other faith, for that matter), and that is both dishonest and rude, but I don't think it is terribly fair, either, to say that only believers should buy a book about Christianity with the assumption they are only doing so to find fault with it.
Just as an objective editor can provide a unique view of a book so, sometimes, can the viewpoint of a non-believer shed light on a religious subject. After all, nothing should be above criticism or discussion so long as it is honest, well-meant and courteous. In such a discussion, both sides wind up learning something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 17:35:54 GMT
Ron, if someone proclaims themselves a non-believer and they go out seeking Christian books I am then under the impression that there is an agenda and it is not an unbiased review. Why does an atheist or humanist buy Christian books? They are already prejudiced and looking for things to criticize. Just leave the books alone.
That may itself be reflecting a prejudice. I am an agnostic (which is very different from being an atheist!). I have an entire shelf full of books on religion. Most of these are on Christianity but there are books on other faiths as well. I don't think that a non-believer or an atheist would necessarily only be interested in a book about Christianity in order to belittle or scoff at it (though I am in no doubt that some do). I certainly don't do that. Christianity, both as a faith and philosophy, is a fascinating subject...and one that has been immensely important in the history of the past two millennia. And it is difficult to deny that there is much of value even if one doesn't accept the supernatural element (exactly as Thomas Jefferson did when he created his redacted "Jefferson Bible"). One certainly doesn't have to be a believer to study Christianity, any more than a Christian should avoid, say, studying Islam, Buddhism or Judaism. There is much to be learned from those faiths as well and I am sure that I would be in the wrong to assume that a Christian would buy a book on Hinduism solely in order to write a critical or condescending review. For myself, I had no problem at all in not only doing the cover for "Daddy, Who Is That Man?" but in also making sure I did something that was faithful to the idea and message the book was trying to convey. For one thing, I respect the author and I respect his faith regardless of what my own feelings may be.
I am all for fair, but to go into it with a purpose to find fault, that is disturbing.
I am all too sure there are non-believers who take a perverse delight in baiting Christians (or people of any other faith, for that matter), and that is both dishonest and rude, but I don't think it is terribly fair, either, to say that only believers should buy a book about Christianity with the assumption they are only doing so to find fault with it.
Just as an objective editor can provide a unique view of a book so, sometimes, can the viewpoint of a non-believer shed light on a religious subject. After all, nothing should be above criticism or discussion so long as it is honest, well-meant and courteous. In such a discussion, both sides wind up learning something. That is a clear and good argument, Ron. Most of all it is not passioned. If one is passionately annoyed by or trying to disprove one's beliefs, or seeking to contradict or find flaw with, perhaps they should not go out of their way to buy the book. If I am honestly interested in Judaism, or Buddhism, by all means, my review is valid. If I am "angry" at the claims, it would be best to leave them alone. I respect the effort put into making a book, and I consider the creators of Who's That Man? friends, all three of them. I will leave the harsh reviews, if any are merited, to strangers.
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Feb 3, 2020 19:06:33 GMT
That is a clear and good argument, Ron. Most of all it is not passioned. If one is passionately annoyed by or trying to disprove one's beliefs, or seeking to contradict or find flaw with, perhaps they should not go out of their way to buy the book. If I am honestly interested in Judaism, or Buddhism, by all means, my review is valid. If I am "angry" at the claims, it would be best to leave them alone. I respect the effort put into making a book, and I consider the creators of Who's That Man? friends, all three of them. I will leave the harsh reviews, if any are merited, to strangers. Some of the most pleasurable discussions I have are with my Christian friends (as well as friends of other faiths). I can express my doubts and questions without being confrontational or argumentative---which is certainly not my purpose. And when we find each of us having to explain the how and why of our beliefs to the others, we find ourselves thinking more about what we believe than we might have otherwise, which is a good thing all around. As you said: "If I am honestly interested in Judaism, or Buddhism, by all means, my review is valid." Indeed! You don't have to agree with or believe in something in order to treat it sympathetically, with understanding or with respect. And I, too, consider the authors of "Who's that Man?" to be friends! (Admittedly one of the main reasons I agreed to do the cover!) I can respect the work that goes into making a book, but I may or may not respect the results. That being said, no book is so utterly hopeless that something good can't be said about it. Whenever I do write a review (which really isn't that very often), I try my best to discover what's best about the book and talk about that first. Then, if there are issues that a potential reader might need to be aware of I feel I am doing both them and the author a favor by pointing them out. Maybe a book would have benefited from an index or bibliography, perhaps there is an omission of a topic that may have been relevant to the author's argument...there are all sorts of things. But even then, there is never any reason to express any criticisms in a way that seems confrontational or rude. For instance, one might say, "This book is an excellent introduction to this and that. The author presents these facts and those points clearly. I disagree with him about this or the other conclusion for this and the other reason, but I can recommend this book to anyone interested in the subject." If I just plain don't like a book and can't think of even one good thing to say about it, then I pass on writing a review at all.
|
|
|
Post by Retread-Retired-Cameron on Feb 3, 2020 19:29:58 GMT
The star rating system is a way for readers to let others know how much the liked a book, and the accompanying verbiage allows the reader leaving the rating to express what they did or did not like about the work in question. On Amazon I have two 4-star reviews for "Regeneration: Gina's Journey". One review starts out "Engaging but simplistic". The other review starts out "An unusual and entertaining sf story". Both readers listed what they liked or found wanting, which is what any author [professional or amateur] should hope for. To be honest, it would be nice to have a collection of ratings including 1 to 3 stars, though I'm not foolish enough to hold my breath waiting for them or a 5-star. The point is a range of ratings [good, bad, indifferent, and / or glowing] lets potential readers get a better idea of whether the book in question is one they'll be interested in. If someone likes my work, great. If someone dislikes my work, again great, because at least the person who found fault read it and said 'nope, not a keeper'. When all is said and done if everyone had the exact same interests and tastes then there would be nothing for writers to write about. On that happy note time to get back into the underbrush. I give good reviews unless there is a real, real, real reason to give anything less. Maggie,
Rain chased me in early, so I have a little time until it stops.
To me a good review of my work covers everything good, bad, and ugly if ugly's there -- I expect nothing less because whatever work I may be doing at any one time the only way I can correct any deficiencies is by knowing what, if anything, might have gone wrong. In my experience objective honesty is rarely cruel, trust me I have seen cruel.
I have a faith, not one descended from the Middle East [or L. Ron Hubbard for that matter]. I have a few religious texts, and given time and funds I will replace those I lost years ago for two reasons [interest and for the kids], Roman Catholic and Orthodox versions of the Bible, the Jewish version, the Quran, as well as those texts I can find for other traditions. I will also get another different text on World Religions .
The one thing I will say on religion is quite simple. It's a journey each of us has to take on our own, and the people who would ridicule someone else for their choice are the people it's best not to associate with, as there will be no peaceful solution. I want my replacements to understand why the world they're in is the way it is, and part of that explanation exists at the intersection of religion and history, which faith they may someday choose is up to them.
|
|