How to Categorize This? Such thing as edgy Christian fiction?

I think if your MC is the thief, you'll get some slack cut. You might still have to keep any real violence offscreen. Take a look at early Brandilyn Collins' books. She gets edgy but keeps strict limits. She can do more now that she has a big following.

I don't recommend taking Dekker or Peretti as examples, only because they're well established and can get away with more as well.

Good luck!

I would say that all the vices you might attribute to "the good thief" are worth exploring. You can certainly allude to them, in some detail without showing actual commissions.

BYW, tradition says that his name was Dismas. His feast day is March 25th. Dismas is my favorite saint. From his cross, he stole the heart of Christ, and so remained a thief to the end.

bchrumby said:

... The idea is that the reader wouldn't find out until the end that the guy they've been reading about is the thief who goes to Paradise after the crucifixion.

Click to expand...

Ohhh, I love this ^ idea.

I'm sure you can find a way to tell his story without getting too explicit. There's plenty of blood and gore in the Bible, but given the context, I've never found it offensive.

I say, go for it - Sounds intriguing.

I think this is entirely possible.

Think about it.

The old testament is rife with rape, murder, incest, bloody wars, dishonesty, thievery, and all manner of nasty subject matter. The trick is to say what you need to say without really saying it. Think of Nicholas Sparks books/movies. There's sex, you know it's there, but you never really see or read it. You read what leads up to and what comes after, you can almost touch the sexual tension, but you never read any of the details of the dirty act. Samuel decapitates a King before he goes on a tirade against Saul, and you know the guy's got to be covered in blood and there's a severed head rolling around on the floor, but it doesn't need to be explained for the scene to carry some heavy weight. Likewise, Lot gets raped by his daughters but we don't walk away from that bit of reading feeling dirty. Okay, maybe a little. But you get the idea.

I'm sure with some work you'll find the balance you need. As a Christian writer you want to be careful to be as mild and safe as you can be. But at the end of the day you're a human being writing about the human experience. It's going to be bloody, dirty, and downright sinful. As long as you stay away from turning your story into a gladiator's arena or a smut show and focus heavily on the redemption of your MC, you should do great.

Idea: Jesus was creating a huge buzz back in the day. Maybe your MC saw the Sermon on the Mount, or was one of the multitudes being fed? Maybe he was blind, but when Jesus healed his handicap he didn't get charity anymore and had to result to crime as a means by which to survive?

Stick close to the moral struggle and you'll do just fine

I love this idea, too!

Sounds like a great idea! Just remember that if you can't get a publisher, then there is always self-publishing. I went to self-publishing for a variety of reasons, but one of them was that my book Toxic has magic in it. I wanted to show how magic is wrong and how we should obey God instead. Because of that, publishers didn't like it.

I'd also urge you to give your MC one or two redeemable qualities. He would be a very dark character and it's hard to like that. If the reader doesn't like a character, they won't read the book. So, he should be bad, icky, awful, etc, but he also needs something to keep us pulling for him.

Good luck and I can't wait to read it!!

~Vicki
www.vickivlucas.com

bchrumby said:

Thanks so much for the input an encouragement, all! I really like the idea of integrating him into key events with Christ...would add a cool dimension. And I think you guys are right, that there is a way to portray a rather depraved life without being explicit. <3 to all of you!

Click to expand...

And, he doesn't have to be violent and depraved to be executed for theft. Up 'til fairly recent times people were executed or transported to Australia for what we would consider minor theft. I imagine Roman law was much the same. They were big on laws and courts and things.
Actually, there are probably sources for crimes and punishment in Roman times that might be useful to you.

It could be that he was stealing for survival, and got caught in the house of someone with authority or connections. Or a cut-purse, working the crowds that formed around Jesus, which would give a logical connection to the Ministry.
Not to say you should make him an innocent victim of circumstance, but he doesn't have to be a vicious monster.

It would be interesting to know the different nuances of whatever word in the original Greek or Aramaic is translated in English Bibles as "thief".

It might well be that the word could refer to a zealot or revolutionary of some sort. There were plenty of those in Judaea at the time.

It's possible that the actual men crucified with Christ weren't thieves as such but members of a revolutionary group who were resisting Hellenization. That would make them more likely to be Pharisees than Sadducees as the latter were aristocratic and priestly and sometimes much more open to Hellenization.

According to Wikipedia, Josephus always referred to revolutionaries as "brigands".

It's also possible that the thief's name was also "Jesus". We all know the story of how Pontius Pilate offered to release one man and the crowd opted for the release of Barabbas. His full name was actually "Jesus Bar Abbas".

Jesus of Nazareth was also not the first religious leader with the name "Jesus" to be crucified for alleged or actual insurrection.

Basically, Judaea was a powderkeg, very interesting and very, very volatile.

A few books worth reading are:

A. H. M. Jones, The Herods of Judaea

Erich S. Gruen, Diaspora: Jews amidst Greeks and Romans

Smallwood, E. Mary, The Jews Under Roman Rule

Rufus Coppertop said:

It's also possible that the thief's name was also "Jesus". We all know the story of how Pontius Pilate offered to release one man and the crowd opted for the release of Barabbas. His full name was actually "Jesus Bar Abbas".

Jesus of Nazareth was also not the first religious leader with the name "Jesus" to be crucified for alleged or actual insurrection.

Click to expand...

You mean it might have been some sort of horrible case of mistaken identity?
There were these three guys named Jesus ... ?

frimble3 said:

You mean it might have been some sort of horrible case of mistaken identity?
There were these three guys named Jesus ... ?

Click to expand...

That has actually occurred to me, yes.

Crowd: - "Release Jesus!"

Pilate: (muttering to himself) "Oh, they must mean Jesus Bar Abbas!" (to the crowd) "Vewy well! I shall welease Jesus!"

Rufus Coppertop said:

That has actually occurred to me, yes.

Crowd: - "Release Jesus!"

Pilate: (muttering to himself) "Oh, they must mean Jesus Bar Abbas!" (to the crowd) "Vewy well! I shall welease Jesus!"

Click to expand...

And this must have been a popular choice, because I've never read that the crowd, on hearing the news, rioted, or even protested. No cries of "You've let the wrong one off!"
Jesus Bar Abbas must have been a hell of a guy. Barabbas the thief was the Robin Hood of Judea, perhaps?

Remember the crowd was primed by their religious leaders to specifically demand the death of Jesus Christ. The Bible specifically says that the leaders were controlling the crowd. It wasn't a random mob, it was a led movement. Also, Barabas was, as I remember, specifically called a murderer in the Bible which was why Pilot made him the choice. He was sure the people would not choose to have him release a murderer back to them over a man he could not find anything but innocent.

Remember, too, that "theft" in those days could cover a multitude of sins -- stealing for years from your employer (anything in this sound familiar?) or pilfering an apple from a cart in a one-off because you were too hungry to resist. Crucifying someone for thievery sounds rather extreme to us, but we're looking through the lens of current-day crime and punishment mores. The 1st C. types may not have felt the way we do.