The Bible - History Channel

[annsni]

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

Do you not think that would be an important part of the story and maybe "led" would be a different word then? Like maybe "battled to escape" or something?

I lead my horse. I don't kill people along the way. I lead my kids through the mall without stabbing and kicking everyone around me. When even the police lead a suspect through a hostile crowd, they push through and that is it. I haven't seen a situation where "lead" means to go all Chuck Norris on those around them, leaving not one person alive.

 

[Luke2427]

Do you not think that would be an important part of the story and maybe "led" would be a different word then? Like maybe "battled to escape" or something?

No, I do not. I do not expect God to record every fine detail of a historical event he wants included in his Scripture. If he did then none of us would be able to carry a copy of the Scriptures to church every Sunday. The Library of Congress would not be able to contain it.

The story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah takes only about a page in the Bible. This leads me to think that there are TONS of details the Lord left out which he did not judge to be pertinent to the feeding of our souls.

The question, Sis, is where do you draw the line on what is acceptable and unacceptable.

I say, as long as the detail in the movie is REASONABLE and does not contradict or undermine in any way the truth being communicated in the text then it is fine.

If you do not accept that rule I think you are forced to become very Pharasaical about Bible movies.

I lead my horse. I don't kill people along the way.

Sergeant york led his troops to safety. Is that statement true?

Yes. And if I think that is all you need to know, have I lied to you? No.

But did Sergeant York kill a lot of men in the process of leading his troops to safety?

Yes.

In a movie about a war zone would you be doing damage to the truth I told you if you depicted Sergeant York killing some men while leading his troops to safety?

No. Of course not.

 

[annsni]

No, I do not. I do not expect God to record every fine detail of a historical event he wants included in his Scripture. If he did then none of us would be able to carry a copy of the Scriptures to church every Sunday. The Library of Congress would not be able to contain it.

The story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah takes only about a page in the Bible. This leads me to think that there are TONS of details the Lord left out which he did not judge to be pertinent to the feeding of our souls.

The question, Sis, is where do you draw the line on what is acceptable and unacceptable.

I say, as long as the detail in the movie is REASONABLE and does not contradict or undermine in any way the truth being communicated in the text then it is fine.

If you do not accept that rule I think you are forced to become very Pharasaical about Bible movies.




Sergeant york led his troops to safety. Is that statement true?

Yes. And if I think that is all you need to know, have I lied to you? No.

But did Sergeant York kill a lot of men in the process of leading his troops to safety?

Yes.

In a movie about a war zone would you be doing damage to the truth I told you if you depicted Sergeant York killing some men while leading his troops to safety?

No. Of course not.

Well, let's see - here's the summary. Am I really being pharasaical??

Lot was sitting at the city gates when the angels came in and he invited them to his home. In the movie, he and his family were escaping the crowd and Lot heard someone crying "Help me!" and found the angels that way.

In the movie, the angels came into Lot's home while his family was cowering in the corner. But in the Bible, the angels ate with Lot's family and it wasn't until later that the people heard about strangers that they came to his door. The angels blinded those who came to the door and they couldn't find the door. We hear nothing else of these people.

The angels told Lot what was going to happen and to get anyone else in his family to escape with him. So lot went to his sons-in-law to tell them and they didn't believe him. In the movie, Lot's daughters were too young to marry.

In the movie, the angels came out, blinded the people, ninja-ed their way out of their and then went running through the night with Lot and his wife and daughters. In the Bible, they left in the morning and the angles "led them out" without the Chuck Norris moves.

 

[Luke2427]

Well, let's see - here's the summary. Am I really being pharasaical??

Lot was sitting at the city gates when the angels came in and he invited them to his home. In the movie, he and his family were escaping the crowd and Lot heard someone crying "Help me!" and found the angels that way.

Now you are introducing another issue. The issue you began to complain about in your conversation with me was not this one.

We need to be consistent and discuss one issue at a time.

In the movie, the angels came into Lot's home while his family was cowering in the corner. But in the Bible, the angels ate with Lot's family and it wasn't until later that the people heard about strangers that they came to his door. The angels blinded those who came to the door and they couldn't find the door. We hear nothing else of these people.

Yet another issue. What does this have to do with the angels slaughtering people as they led Lot's family out of the city?

The angels told Lot what was going to happen and to get anyone else in his family to escape with him. So lot went to his sons-in-law to tell them and they didn't believe him. In the movie, Lot's daughters were too young to marry.

Yet another issue. What does this have to do with the angels slaughtering people as they led Lot's family out of the city?

In the movie, the angels came out, blinded the people, ninja-ed their way out of their and then went running through the night with Lot and his wife and daughters. In the Bible, they left in the morning and the angles "led them out" without the Chuck Norris moves.

You have no earthly idea what "moves" the angels employed in leading Lot's family out.

If you have them walking peacefully out of the city you might be exactly as wrong as you think the producer of this movie is.

The Bible does not SAY.

We don't get to say somebody's take on what might have happened is dead wrong when we don't know what happened OURSELVES.

 

[blackbird]

We don't get to say somebody's take on what might have happened is dead wrong when we don't know what happened OURSELVES.

Neither do we get to say somebody's take is dead right!!!

When the camera leaves the realm of exact Biblical account-----no matter how right it seems---it can only be taken as hearsay

 

[Luke2427]

Neither do we get to say somebody's take is dead right!!!

Can you point to a single person who said it was "dead right"?

When the camera leaves the realm of exact Biblical account-----no matter how right it seems---it can only be taken as hearsay

So then you take issue with the clothes the movie has them wearing, the height of the waves in Noah's flood (the bible does not even SAY there WERE waves), the height of Abraham's wife (the Bible does NOT SAY she was around 5'4"!! How DARE THEY!!!), etc...?

The Bible does not give every detail. If you think that not a SINGLE detail not given in the Bible should be included in the movie then you are simply against any movie whatsoever about the Bible.

The Bible does not say that the angels slew men as they exited the city. Neither does it say they did. It is not unreasonable to figure that they might have. They might not have. The Bible doesn't say.

Where the Bible does not say, you are compelled to take artistic liberty. As long as that liberty is reasonable ans does not contradict or undermine the truth in the text, it is fine.

If you don't like that rule, give us a better one- one which makes sense and allows for a Bible movie to be made. Or be consistent and be against ANY making of a movie about the Bible altogether.

And stop screaming- you're a moderator.

 

[salzer mtn]

In the bible it say's the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left, Ex 14:29. In the movie last night everyone was getting wet from the spray of the water so the ground could not have been dry. The Charleston Heston movie was a better movie in my oppinion, but i understand that each director of movie that tells the same story want's to put a different spin on it, thats just Hollywood.

 

[Bronconagurski]

In the bible it say's the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left, Ex 14:29. In the movie last night everyone was getting wet from the spray of the water so the ground could not have been dry. The Charleston Heston movie was a better movie in my oppinion, but i understand that each director of movie that tells the same story want's to put a different spin on it, thats just Hollywood.

IMO, the Charlton Heston movie had the wrong Pharaoh. I noticed that the no Pharaoh was named in this mini-series.

 

[Zaac]

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.

:thumbsup:

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.

Why? Does Scripture say that homosexuality was rampant in the cities as opposed to heterosexual fornication?

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

:laugh: I guess no one can say it didn't anymore than someone can take the liberty to say that it did. it was interesting to see the angels kicking butt. But I didn't quite understand why they showed up like they had been badly beaten and blooded and then turn around and beat everybody?

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

The Bottom Line....!

In my opinion...the bottom line about this mini-series is the obvious truth that the producers of this series are taking the same kind of liberties with the Biblical text that we ALWAYS see out of anything that originates as a production of Helly....ooops...Hollywood. It will never be "Holy"wood! They have done what is always done in that corrupt industry when handling the Bible. They add to, take away from or just plain change the Inspired Biblical narrative to suit their own desire to tell the story according to their own wishes. Whatever it takes to"appeal" to the largest possible audience and keep the advertisers happy. Bottom line...IT HAS TO PAY$$$$$. Even though they have stated that they wish to honor the true historical aspects of the Bible and its miracles, they simply can't resist the temptation to exercise "artistic license"(and "resist" they didn't!)
That said, I will still watch each installment just because I am interested in the subject matter. I do think it gives us an opportunity to point out its flaws (or it's successes) and be able to tell folks we talk to about the actual truths of the Bible. Maybe if we do that some might see that it really is ONLY the real Bible they can place their confidence in. I was hopeful that they would "get it right" (or at least more right than they apparently have) but I did not have terribly high expectations that they would going into it. As Christians...we have an obligation to our Lord to be true to His Word....period!

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

[blackbird]

Can you point to a single person who said it was "dead right"?




So then you take issue with the clothes the movie has them wearing, the height of the waves in Noah's flood (the bible does not even SAY there WERE waves), the height of Abraham's wife (the Bible does NOT SAY she was around 5'4"!! How DARE THEY!!!), etc...?

The Bible does not give every detail. If you think that not a SINGLE detail not given in the Bible should be included in the movie then you are simply against any movie whatsoever about the Bible.

The Bible does not say that the angels slew men as they exited the city. Neither does it say they did. It is not unreasonable to figure that they might have. They might not have. The Bible doesn't say.

Where the Bible does not say, you are compelled to take artistic liberty. As long as that liberty is reasonable ans does not contradict or undermine the truth in the text, it is fine.

If you don't like that rule, give us a better one- one which makes sense and allows for a Bible movie to be made. Or be consistent and be against ANY making of a movie about the Bible altogether.

And stop screaming- you're a moderator.

Don't blow a gasket, man!!! Watch your movie----but don't receive it as truth!!!:saint:

 

[Zaac]

In my opinion...the bottom line about this mini-series is the obvious truth that the producers of this series are taking the same kind of liberties with the Biblical text that we ALWAYS see out of anything that originates as a production of Helly....ooops...Hollywood. It will never be "Holy"wood! They have done what is always done in that corrupt industry when handling the Bible. They add to, take away from or just plain change the Inspired Biblical narrative to suit their own desire to tell the story according to their own wishes. Whatever it takes to"appeal" to the largest possible audience and keep the advertisers happy. Bottom line...IT HAS TO PAY$$$$$. Even though they have stated that they wish to honor the true historical aspects of the Bible and its miracles, they simply can't resist the temptation to exercise "artistic license"(and "resist" they didn't!)
That said, I will still watch each installment just because I am interested in the subject matter. I do think it gives us an opportunity to point out its flaws (or it's successes) and be able to tell folks we talk to about the actual truths of the Bible. Maybe if we do that some might see that it really is ONLY the real Bible they can place their confidence in. I was hopeful that they would "get it right" (or at least more right than they apparently have) but I did not have terribly high expectations that they would going into it. As Christians...we have an obligation to our Lord to be true to His Word....period!

Bro.Greg:saint:

:applause:

 

[Aaron]

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)

What was Sodom's sin according to the movie? Was it the Socialists' revision: they were stingy with their money?

 

[Aaron]

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.

This is what comes of too much immersion in The Action Bible :laugh:

 

[Baptist4life]

Originally Posted by Luke2427
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.

You'd make a great Roman Catholic! Sounds just like them when they try to defend the assumption of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, etc.!........................ "Well, the Bible doesn't say it DIDN'T HAPPEN"! so, it could have! :laugh:

 

[convicted1]

Moses and the burning bush account with God, left out the part where God told him to take off his shoes because he was on holy ground. Am I the only one bothered by that being left out? FTR, I only watched a few minutes of the monday night episode, and hope to get it in it's entirety and watch it that way.

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

A "Shout Out"

This is what comes of too much immersion in The Action Bible :laugh:

That said, I will at least give a "shout out" for the quality of the artwork in "The Action Bible". I won't even for a second try to argue for it's accuracy but the illustrator, Sergio Cariello is a master at his trade. :thumbsup:. I have a copy cause I like that kind of stuff (the artwork)but it stays firmly planted on the bookshelf (where it belongs) most of the time. By the way.....the editors of the Action Bible avoid the topic of the Sodomites homosexual perversion as well and also don't mention Lot's wicked, sad and misguided attempt to offer his two virgin daughters to the angry mob rather than letting them have the two "visitors". Seems like everybody wants to give the queers a "pass" these days and try to "sanitize" their sickening lifestyle. They need to be instructed about the sinfulness of their sin and clearly taught about our Holy God's attitude toward it. They also need to know that inspite of that, God loves them too and will save them if they will repent and trust Christ by faith. Now...moving back on-topic.......:laugh:

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

[Yeshua1]

:thumbsup:



Why? Does Scripture say that homosexuality was rampant in the cities as opposed to heterosexual fornication?



:laugh: I guess no one can say it didn't anymore than someone can take the liberty to say that it did. it was interesting to see the angels kicking butt. But I didn't quite understand why they showed up like they had been badly beaten and blooded and then turn around and beat everybody?

Yes, for the Lord said that the cities were doing 'exceedingly wicked" acts, and the city was well known for Homosexuality being excused as the right thing, for the men there wanted to gang rape the Angels in the Bible!

 

[Oldtimer]

Heard an interesting question posed to a pastor. One in which I disagreed with the answer he gave. What are your thoughts?

Did Abraham see God's face, when God told him that he would have a son? The scene where Sarah, overhearing the conversation laughed?

 

[Zaac]

Yes, for the Lord said that the cities were doing 'exceedingly wicked" acts,

Notice you put wicked acts in quotations. So in other words that's the only thing God DOES say and the rest is opinion about what was taking place.

and the city was well known for Homosexuality being excused as the right thing,

And where is this in the Bible?

for the men there wanted to gang rape the Angels in the Bible!

That's one ACT. What were the other exceedingly wicked ACTS?