The Bible - History Channel

[Oldtimer]

Thought I'd open a thread on the History Channel's presentation of The Bible for discussion from the Baptist viewpoint.

Recorded the first installment last night, but haven't taken the opportunity to watch it this morning.

If you watched it, your thoughts, please. Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down

 

[RLBosley]

I was really wanting to see this but unfortunately was unable. Looking forward to hearing the reviews!

 

[annsni]

There is another thread discussing this too:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1958247&posted=1#post1958247

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

Generally OK

My wife and I watched it and there were several times she was actually moved to tears. I thought it was generally good and I know it was the stated intention of the producers to present this production as historical fact. As with any production of this nature, it can only be ABOUT the Bible and we must remember that it is NOT "THE" Bible. The portions of the scriptural "narrative" that were presented were done in a fair and tasteful manner. One other review I read (see this link)Bible on history made note of the fact that the Bible is NOT a G-rated book and given the facts of the history that is given in the Word of God this is most certainly TRUE.
In any case, we enjoyed it for what it was and although I did see (more than a few) inaccuracies such as (for instance) the matter of Sarah running after Abraham when he took Isaac to offer him to God was an extra-biblical dramatization that was added to make the scene "pop" in my opinion. Also When Abraham was about to offer Isaac the scene shows a lamb caught in a bush when in fact,the Bible says that it was a ram caught in a thicket "BY HIS HORNS" (Gen.22:13). The other glaring thing I noticed was their complete silence on the homosexual aspect of Sodom (I guess we really shouldn't be surprized about that) and the Biblical FACT that Lot OFFERED his two virgin daughters to the crowd of perverts outside his door if they would leave the angels alone. Also there is nothing in scripture about the angels "slashing" their way out of Sodom when they were leaving with Lot and his family.
Anyway...we will watch it.....but....I will also recommend that anyone who watches it do so with an open Bible and a mind to discuss those things that they have seen. I wasn't looking for the perfection I EXPECT of the Word of God on this series but I did enjoy the visual presentation of something that is dear to my heart. Those are my initial thoughts on the matter. One last thing....I think the visual effects that were used to present the "supernatural" aspects of the Bible narrative such as the parting of the Red sea and the fire that fell on Sodom,Noahs Ark,etc., were very good. I love good special effects!

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

[Bronconagurski]

Thought I'd open a thread on the History Channel's presentation of The Bible for discussion from the Baptist viewpoint.

Recorded the first installment last night, but haven't taken the opportunity to watch it this morning.

If you watched it, your thoughts, please. Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down

Thumbs up for not denying the miraculous. Thumbs down for skipping so much and for getting the details wrong with the destruction of Sodom and the crossing of the Red Sea. I was so hoping to see something on the life of Isaac, Jacob and Joseph, but not to be.

 

[Bronconagurski]

My wife and I watched it and there were several times she was actually moved to tears. I thought it was generally good and I know it was the stated intention of the producers to present this production as historical fact. As with any production of this nature, it can only be ABOUT the Bible and we must remember that it is NOT "THE" Bible. The portions of the scriptural "narrative" that were presented were done in a fair and tasteful manner. One other review I read (see this link)Bible on history made note of the fact that th Bible is NOT a G-rated book and given the facts of the history that is given in the Word of God this is most certainly TRUE.
In any case, we enjoyed it for what it was and although I did see a few inaccuracies such as (for instance) the matter of Sarah running after Abraham when he took Isaac to offer him to God was an extra-biblical dramatization that was added to make the scene "pop" in my opinion. Also When Abraham was about to offer Isaac the scene shows a lamb caught in a bush when in fact,the Bible says that it was a ram caught in a thicket "BY HIS HORNS" (Gen.22:13). The other glaring thing I noticed was their complete silence on the homosexual aspect of Sodom (I guess we really shouldn't be surprized about that) and the Biblical FACT that Lot OFFERED his two virgin daughters to the crowd of perverts outside his door if they would leave the angels alone.
Anyway...we will watch it and I do recommend it.....but....I will also recommend that anyone who watches it do so with an open Bible and a mind to discuss those things that they have seen. I wasn't looking for the perfection I EXPECT of the Word of God on this series but I did enjoy the visual presentation of something that is dear to my heart. Those are my initial thoughts on the matter.One last thing....I think the visual effects that were used to present the "supernatural" aspects of the Bible narrative such as the parting of the Red sea and the fire that fell on Sodom,Noahs Ark,etc., were very good. I love good special effects!

Bro.Greg:saint:

Yes, generally better than most. At least there was no dialogue doubting the miraculous as in some things about biblical history.

I was stirred as well to see how Abraham must have felt about sacrificing his son, and then to be stopped. What struck me at that time and moved me to tears was that there was no one to stay the hand of the Romans when God's Son was sacrificed for us. God the Father chose to give His own Son, and could not even look upon Him as He became sin for us. It pleased God to bruise Him, and Jesus willingly took our place. No Christian should ever say that no one loves them or cares for them as this is the highest order of love, and I can't fathom how great God is to do this for us.

 

[Deacon]

"...moved to tears" .......uggggh

I'd suggest taking the DVD you recorded the program on and smash it.

I watched about 10 minutes of it last evening and was repulsed.

Not only was it boring but the dialogue was ugly.

And did I hear a Cockney accent in Noah's speech?

Rob

 

[Bronconagurski]

"...moved to tears" .......uggggh

I'd suggest taking the DVD you recorded the program on and smash it.

I watched about 10 minutes of it last evening and was repulsed.

Not only was it boring but the dialogue was ugly.

And did I hear a Cockney accent in Noah's speech?

Rob

Yeah, how dare them not do it in whatever language Abraham spoke, and in Hebrew later on? I should go out and smash all my English bibles as well. No biblical dvd is gonna replace the bible, we know that. But sometimes it is good to see how Abraham might have reacted humanly about sacrificing his son. My sons and I have had the chance to discuss the inaccuracies, and what the bible really says, and what things were accurate as well. Talking about God's with you children is always a good thing.

 

[Yeshua1]

My wife and I watched it and there were several times she was actually moved to tears. I thought it was generally good and I know it was the stated intention of the producers to present this production as historical fact. As with any production of this nature, it can only be ABOUT the Bible and we must remember that it is NOT "THE" Bible. The portions of the scriptural "narrative" that were presented were done in a fair and tasteful manner. One other review I read (see this link)Bible on history made note of the fact that the Bible is NOT a G-rated book and given the facts of the history that is given in the Word of God this is most certainly TRUE.
In any case, we enjoyed it for what it was and although I did see (more than a few) inaccuracies such as (for instance) the matter of Sarah running after Abraham when he took Isaac to offer him to God was an extra-biblical dramatization that was added to make the scene "pop" in my opinion. Also When Abraham was about to offer Isaac the scene shows a lamb caught in a bush when in fact,the Bible says that it was a ram caught in a thicket "BY HIS HORNS" (Gen.22:13). The other glaring thing I noticed was their complete silence on the homosexual aspect of Sodom (I guess we really shouldn't be surprized about that) and the Biblical FACT that Lot OFFERED his two virgin daughters to the crowd of perverts outside his door if they would leave the angels alone. Also there is nothing in scripture about the angels "slashing" their way out of Sodom when they were leaving with Lot and his family.
Anyway...we will watch it.....but....I will also recommend that anyone who watches it do so with an open Bible and a mind to discuss those things that they have seen. I wasn't looking for the perfection I EXPECT of the Word of God on this series but I did enjoy the visual presentation of something that is dear to my heart. Those are my initial thoughts on the matter. One last thing....I think the visual effects that were used to present the "supernatural" aspects of the Bible narrative such as the parting of the Red sea and the fire that fell on Sodom,Noahs Ark,etc., were very good. I love good special effects!

Bro.Greg:saint:

Would see that it was interesting to see jesus in the robe speaking to Abraham, and the Black and oriental Angel! Also did not know Abraham was John Rambo of the Bible, how he executed others!

 

[Zaac]

My wife and I watched it and there were several times she was actually moved to tears. I thought it was generally good and I know it was the stated intention of the producers to present this production as historical fact. As with any production of this nature, it can only be ABOUT the Bible and we must remember that it is NOT "THE" Bible. The portions of the scriptural "narrative" that were presented were done in a fair and tasteful manner. One other review I read (see this link)Bible on history made note of the fact that the Bible is NOT a G-rated book and given the facts of the history that is given in the Word of God this is most certainly TRUE.
In any case, we enjoyed it for what it was and although I did see (more than a few) inaccuracies such as (for instance) the matter of Sarah running after Abraham when he took Isaac to offer him to God was an extra-biblical dramatization that was added to make the scene "pop" in my opinion. Also When Abraham was about to offer Isaac the scene shows a lamb caught in a bush when in fact,the Bible says that it was a ram caught in a thicket "BY HIS HORNS" (Gen.22:13). The other glaring thing I noticed was their complete silence on the homosexual aspect of Sodom (I guess we really shouldn't be surprized about that) and the Biblical FACT that Lot OFFERED his two virgin daughters to the crowd of perverts outside his door if they would leave the angels alone. Also there is nothing in scripture about the angels "slashing" their way out of Sodom when they were leaving with Lot and his family.
Anyway...we will watch it.....but....I will also recommend that anyone who watches it do so with an open Bible and a mind to discuss those things that they have seen. I wasn't looking for the perfection I EXPECT of the Word of God on this series but I did enjoy the visual presentation of something that is dear to my heart. Those are my initial thoughts on the matter. One last thing....I think the visual effects that were used to present the "supernatural" aspects of the Bible narrative such as the parting of the Red sea and the fire that fell on Sodom,Noahs Ark,etc., were very good. I love good special effects!

Bro.Greg:saint:

I fell asleep after a long day and have to go back and watch it again. I did notice in the parts that I saw that they probably took a few too many liberties with the Sodom and Gomorrah story.

 

[Yeshua1]

I fell asleep after a long day and have to go back and watch it again. I did notice in the parts that I saw that they probably took a few too many liberties with the Sodom and Gomorrah story.

was pretty cool though seeing Abraham doing his Chuck Norris mode!

 

[Luke2427]

Thought I'd open a thread on the History Channel's presentation of The Bible for discussion from the Baptist viewpoint.

Recorded the first installment last night, but haven't taken the opportunity to watch it this morning.

If you watched it, your thoughts, please. Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down

I liked the first installment a lot.

I thought Noah telling the Creation story on board the ark while tossed violently in the waves of the flood was awesome.

The music was extraordinary.

Noah's haunting voice was powerful.

Everybody's making a big deal out of the Sodom and Gomorrah segment of the film and I think it is much ado about nothing. Nobody on earth is more repulsed by homosexuality than I am. It is abominable. But it was NOT the only, and probably not the PRIMARY sin of S&G.

Furthermore, there was a fleeting moment where a fat man dressed like a woman was visible. It was not altogether avoided.

But, I agree to a very small extent that more should have been made of the rampant homosexuality of the city.

As for the "ninja" angels, who is to say that it did NOT go down that way?

I would have like to have had Moses' conversation with God in the burning bush to be more complete.

Enough was left out to mar the whole idea of Moses' calling.

But overall I was very pleased.

 

[annsni]

As for the "ninja" angels, who is to say that it did NOT go down that way?

Genesis 19:16 " But he hesitated. So the men seized his hand and the hand of his wife and the hands of his two daughters, for the compassion of the Lord was upon him; and they brought him out, and put him outside the city."

Certainly doesn't sound like ninjah angels.

 

[Luke2427]

Genesis 19:16 " But he hesitated. So the men seized his hand and the hand of his wife and the hands of his two daughters, for the compassion of the Lord was upon him; and they brought him out, and put him outside the city."

Certainly doesn't sound like ninjah angels.

It doesn't contradict it.

Who knows what took place in the process of the angels transporting them from their home within the city to the outside of the city.

I'd say it is highly feasible that the angels might HAVE slaughtered numerous people in the process.

Seeing as how the people of Sodom were so desperate to get at Lot and those angels that once smitten with blindness they STILL went after them, it is not unlikely at all that the angels waded through these Sodomites with violence to get Lot and his family out of the city.

So it doesn't NOT sound like it either.

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

"...moved to tears" .......uggggh

I'd suggest taking the DVD you recorded the program on and smash it.

I watched about 10 minutes of it last evening and was repulsed.

Not only was it boring but the dialogue was ugly.

And did I hear a Cockney accent in Noah's speech?

Rob

"My wife and I watched it and there were several times she was actually moved to tears."

Rob...you were and are entitled to your opinion but I will remind you that the material that is being presented in the Bible series does touch on many issues and events that will affect people on an emotional level :tear: regardless of its exact "accuracy". My wife was deeply affected by the truth of the fact that Pharoah DID INDEED order the midwives to slaughter all the Israelites MALE children of which Moses was a survivor. She cried...I was tempted too. That was one of the more terrible aspects of the OT account out of Exodus chapter 1. You can be "repulsed" if you wish.....but I'd be happier if you would attend to apologizing about insulting my wife's tender heart before you go back into hiding.....OK? Thank You.

Bro.Greg:tear::saint:

 

[annsni]

It doesn't contradict it.

Who knows what took place in the process of the angels transporting them from their home within the city to the outside of the city.

I'd say it is highly feasible that the angels might HAVE slaughtered numerous people in the process.

Seeing as how the people of Sodom were so desperate to get at Lot and those angels that once smitten with blindness they STILL went after them, it is not unlikely at all that the angels waded through these Sodomites with violence to get Lot and his family out of the city.

So it doesn't NOT sound like it either.

Seriously? You read in there ninja angels killing people?????????

 

[saved by grace]

What did everyone think about the commercial by the Catholic Church? The organization was Catholics Come Home

The commercial stated that “the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world, it gave us the university system, it developed the scientific method, guided by the Holy Spirit it compiled the bible, Peter was the first Pope and the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago when He said to Simon, you are rock and upon this rock I will build my Church.”

 

[Luke2427]

Seriously? You read in there ninja angels killing people?????????

Its not about "reading in". It is about "consistent WITH".

I don't read in the text that Lot had brown curly hair, either. But there is nothing in the text that would lead me to think that the movie producer misrepresented the text by giving Lot brown curly hair.

We don't know that the sky was blue the day Abraham and Lot parted. But it was in the movie. Are we to say, "That movie writer is ADDING TO THE STORY!!"

Of course not.

Is it VERY reasonable that as the angels led Lot and his family out of the highly populated city wherein a hoard of men just desperately tried to break into Lots house and have their way with Lot's guest- is it VERY reasonable that the angels might have killed numerous people on the way out of the city? Certainly it is.


Did it happen for sure? No. We don't know.

But we don't know that it didn't happen, either. All we know is that it is not unreasonable to think that it might have. There is no abuse to the text in having the angels kill some people on the way out of the city.

Saying, "The text does not say..." is not a real argument. It is an argument from silence which is a fallacy.

What you have to decide is how strict you are going to be in demanding that every single detail of the movie has to have DIRECT reference in the text.

If you did that, you could not have a movie. You would have people walking when the text does not SAY that they were walking. You will have people looking to the east when the text does not say which way they were looking.

You can be pharisaical about this kind of thing.

As long as the artistic liberty taken is reasonable and not contrary to the text- it is fine.

Now you may be tempted to say something like, "So if the producer wanted he could have given Lot machine guns and had him go Rambo on the Sodomites, right?" And the answer is- No. That is not REASONABLE.

But what the producer had the angels doing is PERFECTLY reasonable. In fact, we DO see angels slaughtering people like this elsewhere in the Bible.

 

[annsni]

Well, I guess you have a different understanding of the term "led".

Not to mention that Lot left in the morning. After he had gone to his son-in-laws the night before to tell them to go with them. Yeah - none of that happened at all but instead we see them escaping, playing Chuck Norris and running in the night. Quite accurate. *sarcasm alert*

 

[Luke2427]

Well, I guess you have a different understanding of the term "led".

Not to mention that Lot left in the morning. After he had gone to his son-in-laws the night before to tell them to go with them. Yeah - none of that happened at all but instead we see them escaping, playing Chuck Norris and running in the night. Quite accurate. *sarcasm alert*

So then you are certain that the angels did NOT slay any Sodomites as they led Lots family out of Sodom, right?