Skip to main content

The Brick Testament

The Bible, done in Lego. I particularly like the Book of Job. And advice on stoning. This is officially the work of a Reverend, but is clearly a clever spoof. It certainly gets you to look at the Bible in a new way. Some bits are very funny.

This reminds me of Outrageous Tales From the Old Testament, as it's just the original, unvarnished text illustrated (with, I grant you, some rather tongue in cheek speech bubbles). The illustrations, being in an incongruous style, bring home just outrageous the tales really are.

Some nice stuff in the shop. Ships to U.K.

The page for the book of the Ten Commandments contains this review:

This book, and the corresponding website, is written by an atheist, and the website contains disturbing Lego "creations" by the author that young children should not be exposed to. How irresponsible for this author to use children to advance his agenda regarding his lack of belief in God.

Ironic. Possibly this is itself a spoof comment? As I say, the book presents the original text, and illustrates it using Lego. How could showing illustrated passages of the Bible to a child be a problem? Because this really is the unvarnished text, revealed in all its gory horror and moral perniciousness - not the highly selective, Disney-fied version kids usually get in their "Bible Stories For Children."


Freethinker said…
That's brilliant! Thanks for that.

Here is The Rev. Brendan Powell Smith's personal website:
Anonymous said…
I thought you might have focused on this one about Stephen .

Looking forward to the Lego versions of other classics.

Popular posts from this blog


(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o