Brickaroo> There’s a massive spectrum of views between the two extremes you give as examples.

One other problem I have is the author not making his intentions known to the reader. It seems very disingenuous to me to profit from the very people your mocking, touching on beliefs that are deeply held.

From a LEGO standpoint, his presentation and building technique are both excellent.

There’s basically two possible biases with which someone will read the Bible. The Christian reads the Bible with the bias that the words are true (and beneficial).

The writer of the ‘Brick Bible’ presents the material from the perspective that the Bible JUST a collection of stories. In this case, a perspective that it is a collection of stories that are quite mock-able.

Only one of these biases is the correct way to read the Bible.

Exactly.

Despite Smith’s own, publically acknowledged skepticism about organized Christianity, I do not think that it is fair to criticize his work as ‘incomplete’ or his stories as ‘out of context.’ The online Brick Testament is apparently the most complete illustrated Bible ever, and yet it is woefully incomplete because the book is just so large. Any adaptor is forced to pick and choose which parts to present. The Bible itself is an anthology, a collection of stories by numerous authors which, especially in the Old Testament, have very little in the way of a common theme other than telling the story of the Jews.

I cannot help but feel that the complaint here is not that Smith has taken stories ‘out of context,’ but that he has not framed these stories as a Christian would. He has not added contemporary Christian interpretation. That is, in fact, his point: to make the Bible itself accessible without imposing the framework of a particular interpretation. Millions of people grow up with a ‘context’ imposed on them by their religious leaders without really examining what the Bible actually SAYS (which, in itself, is really a translation of a translation anyway). Note how many people believe that the story of the Rapture or the 6,000 year age of the earth are actually in the Bible!

If it is false advertising to present a book without the extensive ‘background’ (the Biblical ‘Expanded Universe’) that has been developed around it by people other than the author, then Smith is no less guilty than his publisher. I do not think this is the case. The printed Brick Bible is apparently not a direct use of the online Brick Testament: I have read that it has been somewhat ‘sanitized,’ with somme of the sex downplayed (if not the violence). And yet there are Christians who find the more explicit online version quite reasonable.

The reaction by Sam’s Club implies that a published version of this public domain document MUST conform to accepted religious doctrine in order to be sold in their store. Banning alternative faithful presentations of the book that simply do not toe the line is no better than prohibiting the sale of books about 9-11 being an ‘inside job,’ refusing to sell Ayn Rand novels, or not carrying books by Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck. IN a word, censorship.

As Andhe pointed out, if customers believe that this is a happy Lego version of the Bible intended to assist in the inculcation of modern Christian interpretation in their children, clearly they are incorrect. But should the book then have a big sticker on it that says, “warning, this is not a Christian-approved product?” That is no less an instance of censorship, and no better than putitng a sticker on a D&D mannual saying, “this book talks about demons,” or a sticker on the Koran saying, “this thing has it all wrong.”

Especially in the era of Amazon.com and many other online merchants there’s simply no reason to hang-wring over a single (admittedly large) merchant choosing not to sell something.

There is also the fact that LEGO = kids for 98% of the population and selling something that says LEGO on it and yet isn’t really suitable for kids is not sensible for a general interest store like Walmart.

Let’s not go overboard here. The book, as stated, gives an incomplete and at times out of context look at specific incidents in the Bible. That might create great cannon fodder for its (originally) intended audience, but let’s not pretend that this is an unbiased look at the source material that can strengthen someone’s faith.

“I’d love to hear about a campaign to have the Bible banned from Sam’s Club on exactly the same grounds they used to ban Brandon’s illustrated LEGO Bible. Think of the children! Anyway, buy the book. Don’t let Sam’s Club/Walmart win.”
I know you’re being tongue in cheek here (at least I think you are), but this exposes the heart of the problem. I don’t know how much Brendan had a say in the marketing, but misleading marketing is what led to the ban. On it’s face, this book looks like unique presentation of the common children’s Bible story books. The Bible is an adult book, even if parts of it are child-friendly.
I love Die Hard but I’m not about to sit down and watch it with my five year old nephew.