The Bronze Bow... Is it just me

[Ibbygirl]

Or did anyone else really dislike this book? This was one of the required readings for our LA curriculum this year and we just recently finished it (Thank God!) I really wanted to like it since it was set during the time when Jesus was ministering here on Earth, but I just could not get into this thing at all. The pace of this book was so boring to me. I kept wating for Daniel to change as a person, but he stays angry the entire time and then at the end he doesn't even go to follow Jesus. I know that this book gets very high marks and that the author is an award winning writer, but I just couldn't get into it. Maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm just too thick and I'm missing some really great message of the book, I don't know. If someone read it and loved it please chime in and help me see because I'm just not getting it. Please tell me I'm not the only one. :)

Edited May 15, 2009 by Ibbygirl

[Peela]

Well, we are not even Christian and we loved it. When I pre-read it for my kids last year, I couldn't put it down! They loved it and they are not too keen on Christian books.

 

But I give you complete permission to have your own taste in books :)

[Catherine]

I'm with you -we are not conservative Christians, at all, but I loved this book very much, and my 11 you ds said it was his favorite for the year.

 

When we discussed it, my impression was that he liked the depiction of love winning out over hate, in a nutshell.

[Ibbygirl]

Sheesh!! I don't know what I am missing. I got the love winning over hate message, but the fact that it comes on the very last page to me felt so lame. All of the tensions in the book never seemed to really amount to anything... Rosh never leads the rebellion, Daniel tries and realizes he's not powerful enough, the Romans are still there, and it's never even certain whether he goes to follow Jesus or not. I just felt ripped off. Although I liked the characters of Thacia and especially Samson, I just found Daniels smoldering anger for the entire length of the story too much. I kept waiting for something to give you know?

[Danestress]

I think that anger was very real and it lasted for many years, and eventually the Romans punished the Jews pretty brutally for their rebellion.

 

The author can't really change that history. Anger smolders, rebellion brews, no one can really defeat the Romans, and eventually the Romans demonstrate that very fact.

 

But Jesus transformed individual lives, and I thought the book showed that without giving us a trite or predictable ending.

 

I liked it.

[angela in ohio]

I really liked the book, but it did feel a bit like the author still had a chapter or two to write, but the publisher called and told her to finish it in the next ten minutes, so she just slapped a few paragraphs on to end it and sent it. :001_smile:

[LibraryLover]

I was fully prepared to not like it, but it goes down in our hsing readaloud log as one of the best. I was very moved by it.

 

Sometimes it takes a redo. Try it again...although we can't all like the same things all the time...that's ok.

[Ibbygirl]

I think that anger was very real and it lasted for many years, and eventually the Romans punished the Jews pretty brutally for their rebellion.

 

The author can't really change that history. Anger smolders, rebellion brews, no one can really defeat the Romans, and eventually the Romans demonstrate that very fact.

 

But Jesus transformed individual lives, and I thought the book showed that without giving us a trite or predictable ending.

 

I liked it.

 

 

This is all very true and very well said if I may add. I think if you had written the book I probably would have liked it much better. ;) :D hehe You raise up a lot of good points, but I wish that at least the book could have tied up whether or not Daniel decides to follow Jesus. That would have been realistic and set within the history as well. I had trouble with the author's sentence structures as well. They seemed un-necessarily cumbersome at times. I found that as I was reading it aloud to my daughter that there were several times I had to re-read a sentence because the word order didn't flow well. I don't know if that was by design to add a type of emotion to the story, but that was another thing that bugged me about it. It seems I am the only person who didn't care for this book. I guess it just confirms to me what I have always known, that I am from another planet. ;) hehe

[Ibbygirl]

I was fully prepared to not like it, but it goes down in our hsing readaloud log as one of the best. I was very moved by it.

 

Sometimes it takes a redo. Try it again...although we can't all like the same things all the time...that's ok.

 

 

I think I will take your advice and try it again in a couple of years. Hopefully I'll see what I'm not getting. :)

[Jen in PA]

I haven't read it since I was in 7th grade (ps), and I still remember loving it!

[Maria from IN]

I was under the impression that Daniel began his long journey towards following Jesus when he invited the Roman soldier into his house to see Leah. After a lifetime of hate, that's a pretty big step for a young man, I would think.

 

I just took it as his answer to Jesus' question, "Would you love for me to the end?"

[Ibbygirl]

Sigh! What's wrong with me?? Why don't I like this book? hehehe I feel like I must be totally blind because I just don't see what you all see in it. :confused:

 

What did you like about it??

[Ibbygirl]

I was under the impression that Daniel began his long journey towards following Jesus when he invited the Roman soldier into his house to see Leah. After a lifetime of hate, that's a pretty big step for a young man, I would think.

 

I just took it as his answer to Jesus' question, "Would you love for me to the end?"

 

 

You see, I thought that too, but then it says, "Haltingly, Daniel walked, not after Jesus, but across the road, till he stood before the boy."

 

So I don't know if this is just the first step in the ultimate step of following after Christ or if he is choosing here to not follow Christ and trying to do things in his own strength. :confused:

[chaik76]

You see, I thought that too, but then it says, "Haltingly, Daniel walked, not after Jesus, but across the road, till he stood before the boy."

 

So I don't know if this is just the first step in the ultimate step of following after Christ or if he is choosing here to not follow Christ and trying to do things in his own strength. :confused:

Maybe the point was to get us to think about it like we are? Because if the question was answered...well, we wouldn't be on WTM talking about it!:001_huh:

 

(Honestly, I haven't read this yet, but would probably have the same problems as you...I like there to be resolution in my endings!)

[Ibbygirl]

Maybe the point was to get us to think about it like we are? Because if the question was answered...well, we wouldn't be on WTM talking about it!:001_huh:

 

(Honestly, I haven't read this yet, but would probably have the same problems as you...I like there to be resolution in my endings!)

 

 

hehehehe Maybe.... but for me, I'd take the Little House books over this one any day of the week. That entire series I read in like 4 days!! I couldn't put the books down. :)

[Maria from IN]

You see, I thought that too, but then it says, "Haltingly, Daniel walked, not after Jesus, but across the road, till he stood before the boy."

 

So I don't know if this is just the first step in the ultimate step of following after Christ or if he is choosing here to not follow Christ and trying to do things in his own strength. :confused:

 

Perhaps he doesn't realize yet that his own strength comes from Jesus. I keep remembering what the boys quoted throughout the book: "He trains my hands for war, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze..."

 

Daniel told Jesus that he would fight for him to the end. That's when Jesus asked him to "love for me to the end." Daniel was convinced that the real fight was with tools and muscle and manpower, when the fight was really within his own heart (and the heart of each and every person). That's what I took from it, anyway.

 

This is one of those times when I wish I could read the author's mind!

 

:D

[angela in ohio]

You see, I thought that too, but then it says, "Haltingly, Daniel walked, not after Jesus, but across the road, till he stood before the boy."

 

So I don't know if this is just the first step in the ultimate step of following after Christ or if he is choosing here to not follow Christ and trying to do things in his own strength. :confused:

 

I took it as the first step to following Christ also. --> We cannot follow the person of Christ physically now, but we can follow Him in our interactions with others.

[Ibbygirl]

I took it as the first step to following Christ also. --> We cannot follow the person of Christ physically now, but we can follow Him in our interactions with others.

 

 

That's a good point. I guess that's my problem. I just take everything so literally and don't always see the "hidden" message or point in a text. For me, with Daniel being so angry throughout the entire book that reading the story that maintains such a high level of tension, I got tired of it and the ending was so anti-climactic for me. I don't know, I guess I just didn't get into the author's style too much. I have read books that don't have happy endings and even though one always hopes for a nice happy ending that ties up all the loose ends with a nice pretty bow and presents it to the reader, this is not always the case, because life is not like this. I get that, but just this book.... I don't know, I just got bored with Daniel's constant foul temper. I'm glad that at the end he obviously made some turn around, but I wish the author had fleshed the ending out more and gotten into more details of Daniel's transformation. I guess the ending just frustrates me.

[mcconnellboys]

But he *did* decide. He decided when he allowed himself to be ruled by love, rather than hate. He crossed the line when he asked the Roman soldier into his house. But he had already begun the journey when he consented to Thacia's feelings for him, something he'd always said he couldn't do because of his "mission" of hate.

 

Now, if you really want to be blown away, go read C.S. Lewis' Till We Have Faces while thoughts of BB are still in your mind.....

[mcconnellboys]

What would it have served if he would have followed Christ to say thanks so him? He couldn't leave Leah to follow him permanently, so he could only follow long enough to say thanks. He realized that Christ didn't need his thanks. He needed him to love, as he had asked him to earlier. So he began. The ultimate test of love is to love one's enemy. It is a simple thing to love those like us. It is a most difficult thing to love those who are very different and hateful to us....

[mcconnellboys]

I believe it is Daniel who decides, near the end, that perhaps the bow of bronze can only be bent with love, rather than with any other form of strength....

[mcconnellboys]

For me, my favorite part of this story isn't even in the ending. My favorite part is when Daniel and either Joel or Simon are discussing why Jesus can't heal everyone who comes to Him. They postulate about people being invested in their afflictions and unable to give that up and receive the healing that is freely offered to them. Daniel doesn't realize that he is just like that throughout the entire story. He's totally invested in his hatred and totally unwilling to give it up for anything - even for Thacia. He has to release it completely in the end, in order to experience the healing power of Jesus' love. And he does....

[Lovedtodeath]

 

My favorite part is when Daniel and either Joel or Simon are discussing why Jesus can't heal everyone who comes to Him.

Well, that disturbs me. I see nothing Biblical in the idea that Jesus couldn't heal someone. The scriptures say that Jesus "healed them all".

[Ibbygirl]

Well, that disturbs me. I see nothing Biblical in the idea that Jesus couldn't heal someone. The scriptures say that Jesus "healed them all".

 

 

Oh no, that's not what she means. :) In the book they are talking about why not all of them are healed, not because of Jesus, but rather because of that person's own lack of faith or unwillingness to be truly healed. They are talking about those who truly want to stay sick because it is easier than dealing with going back to family or back to work or back to being a contributing member in society. Obviously Jesus has all power to heal, but the same way that Christ came to save the world from sin, there are those who will not be saved. Not because of anything to do with Christ. His sacrifice was perfect and sufficient for the salvation of all mankind, but not all mankind will chose to accept His gift of salvation. That's what she was meaning about them all not being healed.

[Lovedtodeath]

But there were people that were healed by only touching him. There were people that were healed and then ungratefully did not thank Jesus or tell anyone about it. They were healed no matter what. :confused:

 

I haven't read the book so I guess I shouldn't comment on what it says. ;)

[Ibbygirl]

Regena, you bring up a lot of good points. Like I said, I guess I can't see the forest for the trees because I read the entire book and have learned more about it from your posts than from the entirety of what I read. hehe I must be REALLY thick! hehe I LOVE C.S. Lewis! I've read just about all of his Narnia books and would really like to get into his non-fiction writings. I'll have to check that book out. Thanks for the recommendation. :)

[Ibbygirl]

But there were people that were healed by only touching him. There were people that were healed and then ungratefully did not thank Jesus or tell anyone about it. They were healed no matter what. :confused:

 

I haven't read the book so I guess I shouldn't comment on what it says. ;)

 

 

But the people who touched Him also believed that if they did touch Him they would be healed. That was active faith on their part. I've never seen where Jesus required gratitude as a pre-requisite for healing, but He did require an element of faith. I guess that is the idea that the author is exploring in the book. The author, I assume, was thinking about the people that Jesus ministered too and surmised that not all of them would have been healed because not all of them would have the faith to be so. The same way that not all will be saved.

 

Even though the Gospels don't specifically mention anyone who was not healed by Christ, I guess the logic could follow since not all are saved either. Either way it is the author's literary license and she's entitled to her opinion I guess. ;) :D

 

You are also and I hope you feel free to express it whether you've read the book or not. :)

 

Blessings,

Jennifer

[mcconnellboys]

Well, it's a re-telling of a classical myth - but the spin on it is relevant to the point of BB, I think....

[mcconnellboys]

Yes, but as Jennifer points out, any person who believed that they would be healed by Him and who truly *wanted* that healing, *was* healed. They didn't have to believe He was the Messiah, or want to follow Him, or even thank Him afterward. But they did have to truly want the healing.

 

You know well that God grants us free will. He will not do a thing to us or for us that we absolutely do not want. And He always knows what we *really* want, even if we won't admit it out loud. He could often do things to/for us that were for our own good that might be contrary to what we want - but He doesn't.

 

The point they were discussing was about what people truly wanted and them being able to *know* what they truly wanted for themselves (and Jennifer, this is what Lewis' book I mentioned deals with, too).

 

For instance, as I believe they mention, if a lame man has been lame all his life and made his living through begging, does he truly want to be cured? How then, will he make a living for his family? Will he have to learn to go out and toil hard all day to earn the same he earned before by sitting in the shade and begging at his ease? If so, does he really, truly *want* to be healed? Or is he just there because someone else urged him to come, or manually brought him? If *he* wants it, he will receive it. If *he* does not truly want it, he will not receive it. Free will is a beautiful thing - but we must learn to truly know ourselves in order for it to work to fullest effect....

 

I just think this has very strong implications for our lives today....

[Luanne]

that I didn't like it, but that wouldn't be the truth. I really enjoyed this book. I am planning on using it as a read-aloud with my daughter soon.

[Garga]

Matt 13:58 says, "And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief." I guess that's where it's coming from. He wanted to, but their unbelief somehow prevented it.

[Lovedtodeath]

Thanks for looking into it, Garga. I always understood that scripture to mean that doing the mighty works would be wasted on them, so he chose not to.

 

Either way it is the author's literary license and she's entitled to her opinion I guess. ;) :D

 

You are also and I hope you feel free to express it whether you've read the book or not. :)

Thank you. I still don't like it. I want to compliment you on your gracious response.

[momo9]

I didn't like it that much either....it just made for dry reading.:toetap05:

[chaik76]

hehehehe Maybe.... but for me, I'd take the Little House books over this one any day of the week. That entire series I read in like 4 days!! I couldn't put the books down. :)

I love that series too!:D

[Vida Winter]

But he *did* decide. He decided when he allowed himself to be ruled by love, rather than hate. He crossed the line when he asked the Roman soldier into his house. But he had already begun the journey when he consented to Thacia's feelings for him, something he'd always said he couldn't do because of his "mission" of hate.

 

 

:iagree:

 

I pre-read this book earlier this year because my 13yo dd was going to read it. It had a very powerful message of Jesus' love transcending all.

[angela in ohio]

You know well that God grants us free will. He will not do a thing to us or for us that we absolutely do not want. And He always knows what we *really* want, even if we won't admit it out loud. He could often do things to/for us that were for our own good that might be contrary to what we want - but He doesn't.

 

 

See, I'm looking at it from a Reformed perspective, so I believe the opposite. I take the lack of healing to mean that they were made by God to not believe that Jesus had the power to heal, and so they were not healed because of that lack of faith. :001_smile:

 

I'd have to re-read it to remember exactly what she said aobut those who weren't healed. It's been a few months since I read it last. The biggest thing that does stick in my mind from the book is what I posted before - following Christ by loving others.

[pandemonium]

Loved it here.

[Kisa in CA]

 

www.centerforlit.com has a free study guide on this book. Maybe it could help you delve into some of the meaning or reasons people find it so appealing? I just happen to be pre-reading it now and am only in the 4th chapter, so I can't say much more.