Posted on 03/02/2014 2:54:54 PM PST by Gamecock
A repurposed segment of last year’s History Channel miniseries “The Bible,” the film stars Diogo Morgado, a Portuguese actor billed as “the first Latin Jesus.” He makes for a sunny, can-do Portuguesus wandering the land with a miracles-on-demand service available to anyone who walks up to him. He seems oddly, disturbingly in love with himself as he dazzles the Israelites with his fluorescent, Brad Pitt smile.
It trivializes Christian thought to reduce the parables to one-liners and the miracles to magic tricks, but the film was made with the entirely unsurprising input of Joel Osteen, the charlatan self-help guru who has advised his followers that prayer can help you snag a good parking space.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
the film was made with the entirely unsurprising input of Joel Osteen,
_________________________________
therein is part of the problem..
Joel is not the Bible believer his dad, John was...
“but the film was made with the entirely unsurprising input of Joel Osteen, the charlatan self-help guru who has advised his followers that prayer can help you snag a good parking space.”
With God all things are possible!
“‘Son of God’ fails to deliver a holy message”
Well, it IS just a movie and it would seem that a truly holy message would come from an authority a lot higher than Hollywood.
I hope the audience didn’t have to sit through 30 minutes of trashy, lewd, coming attractions like I did. The audience was filled with so many young people. Satan must have been pleased.
the producers next boffo box office bonanaza:....
50 Shades of Jesus...
followed By Jesus and Mister Bruce...
just imagine how HIDEOUSLY off course they can possibly go
The Lord came to save people from their sins, not just to change the 'world'.
interesting...I loved “Jesus of Nazareth”, but this movie, I feel, shows the real happy spirit of Jesus better than any other that I have seen. Magic tricks? Oh really...well the real miracles were magic! God’s magic that did impress people all over! Yes, he smiles magnetically, just as a true Christian does! Happy...joyful! Mocking that is really petty.
Yikes! I have no interest in watching this movie.
>“but the film was made with the entirely unsurprising input of Joel Osteen, the charlatan self-help guru who has advised his followers that prayer can help you snag a good parking space.”<
The Writer is full of it, Osteen always advised us to use the Valet, unless we’re in a Limo of course.
I saw the movie and as I posted before. . .
“After having to watch 30 minutes of trash in previews of coming attractions (those contained more damaging images than any so called violence in this movie), I saw Son of God on Friday and it was definitely lacking in reaching the masses with the salvation message (the real reason for Christ coming to earth). I agree that the depiction of the Lazarus scene was weak at best. Scriptures were left unfinished that would have given the viewing audience how to be saved. As much as most Christians wanted this to be THE MOVIE THAT WOULD CATCH THE WORLD BY STORM OF JESUS DYING TO SAVE US FROM OURSELVES (OUR SINS) this movie falls short. There have been other low budget films that have done far better. This is a Hollywood and unfortunately Christian networks hype.
No unsaved person except those under conviction can walk away from the film with how to be saved from eternal damnation. It just isn’t there. I hope if anyone took a friend, afterwards there was much discussion and filling in the blanks of the obvious missing dialogue of the movie.”
Just added:
To leave out Jesus and His victory over temptation by satan after 40 days of hunger and leave out the real reason for the Cross was irresponsible or perhaps was it politically expedient? . . .The Movie Son of God rather than THE Son of God . .. leaves the impression there is more than one way to God in Heaven rather than by the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
There is a lot of that from hip-hop, marketing oriented, cool and spunky christian networks. Gives an impression of shallow and superficial.
Ditto. I was, too. Nothing about "The Bible" impressed me, so I won't be seeing this thing, either.
“Well, it IS just a movie and it would seem that a truly holy message would come from an authority a lot higher than Hollywood.”
Right on. Unfortunately the inspiration of “Son of God” came from New Age gurus instead of earnest Christians who wanted to portray a worshipful and accurate account of the Good News.
There are also reports that church groups bought hundreds of thousands of tickets to give away for free. So the real test will come when those free tickets run out.
SOG ended up #2 for the weekend, a very respectable showing even if the deck was stacked for it.
My family won’t be seeing Son of God on idolatry grounds. This is a serious issue that few concern themselves with. The makers of this film demonstrate an ignorance of the meaning of the Second Commandment, which forbids using images to represent God.
“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.”
This commandment prohibits the creation and use of graven images. It essentially brings to mind that God is Spirit, not to be conceived of or fashioned in man’s image, or any other creature. In Deuteronomy 4:12-16 is found a similar passage,
“And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice. And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it. Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female.…”
What is forbidden is the similitude of the Lord Himself. No similitude of the Divine was given to the people and none was to be made. Moreover, in the New Testament, we see that no “similitude” of Christ Jesus was given, and the commandment must remain unabridged. Any similitude or image of Father, Son, or Holy Spirit is sinful and insulting to the majesty of the Lord God. And what of those who seek balm for their conscience in preferring pictures over statues, as if the lack of one dimension transforms the image into a thing acceptable unto God? They well imagine that they have acted more nobly toward the Lord because theirs is not a “graven image” in 3-dimensional form. It comforts them not to be upon the Roman road of idolatry, oblivious to the fact that they parallel it upon the Greek route. God forbids the making of a likeness of anything. Therefore, it is a transgression of God’s law to make a “representation” or “semblance” of anything in heaven or upon the earth, to characterize God. He calls those who break this commandment “those who hate me,” and those who keep the commandment, “those who love me.” Punishment for iniquity is promised to the transgressors, while blessing is pledged to the adherents. From God’s perspective, idolatry is spiritual adultery; so with the indignant reaction of a betrayed husband, He continues, “for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”
I tend to think that perhaps the movie isn’t what a lot of well seasoned Christians may glean something from, but there are a LOT of people it may at least plant a seed with.
Everyone has to start somewhere, and if God’s word is anywhere in the movie, it will not return void. If the movie result in some people seeking and finding, then I applaud it.
I would say that is changing the world.
My wife and I went to see the movie. We couldn't see anything wrong with this one. We have seen most of the rest, even the one starring Jeffery Hunter.
Remember, the books depicting Jesus' life were written years after he died and was resurrected.
Furthermore, how can a 2 hour movie depict 1080 days of ministry?
No “similitude”?
Gee, don’t the Muslim’s teach the same thing about Mohammed?
What a kwinkydink.
Should we even imagine what Jesus looked like? Isn’t that “similitude,” too?
What about when He left his face imprint on the sweat rag during His walk with the cross. Does that mean we can copy His face as long as its in agony, with blood?
If we aren’t supposed to think of His physical form, why didn’t He just come as a ball of light? And if He wants us to contemplate the fact that He came here in human form, why wouldn’t He want us to contemplate the image of that form?
Joel Osteen’s message is not unlike that of the late Reverend Ike.
I think you have a very valid point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.