Posted on 03/04/2013 8:42:23 AM PST by yorkie
'The Bible' miniseries produced by the History Channel is a disappointment for any family hoping for a new way to share the Bible's stories with their children. 'The Bible' miniseries, not altogether surprising given the History Channel's relentless ratings focus, sensationalizes the Bible's stories. Angel ninjas? Really?
The Bible, in addition to being the basis for various religious beliefs, is a fascinating historical conglomeration of stories that can teach us about the customs, times, travails, and conditions of the ancient Middle East that create a social context for modern day news, like the plague of locusts currently hitting Egypt. However "The Bible" miniseries on the History Channel so graphically depicts a predictably selective collection of the stories that some parents may not want kids to view it.
"The Bible" miniseries, for me, is less about what you believe and more about what you believe your family will take away from watching this series. After watching the first installment and trailers for upcoming episodes, I think that if you’re not willing to let your elementary-school child watch "300" and the "Twilight" series you should steer clear of this as a family viewing session.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
OP posted this below the article excerpt: “Did you watch it? What did YOU think?”
That’s what I posted. My opinion. Good day.
I watched it. It was weighed in the balance and found wanting. Where was the story of Joseph? The Sodom sequence was really weird. Many many things left out so far. The Vikings show was far better.
A great opportunity to watch something else.
It's not for kids. It's about how man interprets freedom. The OT is freedom to fight battles for land - civilization has got that down pat. The NT is about freedom from sin - civilization here is defining sin down.
I just hope the series finishes the OT history quickly and gets to spend more time on God's visit to man.
Abraham & Sarah looked quite youthful for a couple that had just passed the century mark when their son Isaac was born.
At least the two angels didn’t greet Abraham with “Our strength is our diversity”. And the ninja angel wound up getting wounded, I thought they were divine. And boy, the youthful Moses gave Ramses a scar to take to his grave, it hadn’t even healed by the time of the Exodus. BTW, Ramses forgot his war crown. Must have been in a hurry.
Left out the golden calf episode, too. Moses looked more like Charles Manson in this version; I’ll stick with Charlton Heston.
Last night’s show basically dealt with Abraham and Moses.
They did a decent job telling the story with a little bit of Hollywood....which is to be expected.
If someone didn’t like the graphic nature of women turning to salt, of plagues in Egypt, of children being sent away from home, of a child nearly sacrificed, and of wife sharing, then they better not read the bible in the first place.
The ninja angels were pure Hollywood, but other than that, I can’t think of anything in the first episode that really raised my eyebrows.
My sense is that they’re going to deal with Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samson, David, Daniel, Jesus life, His death/burial/resurrection, and then the early Church.
That’s it, and that’s a lot, but it’s also leaving out a huge amount more. But Downey and husband have always said they were telling just a few of the stories in the limited time that they did have.
I watched the whole thing, and had a bad feeling throughout.
The dialogue was all “made up”, and didn’t jibe with actual Scripture. I was expecting sentences that never got said, and heard ones that aren’t in the Bible.
All the characters came across as boorish and unlikable, except perhaps for adorable little Ishmael, who was supposed to be 14 and looked around 9. (A 14 year old would be too gawky and adolescent to be attractive!)
Sarah came across as a total bitch, who hated Ishmael for no reason, although the Bible CLEARLY states that Ishmael was Teasing (sporting with, playing with, tormenting, bullying) Baby Isaac. The Hebrew commentaries even go so far as to say that this “teasing” bordered on molestation.
The Three Angels were depicted shrouded in black, and were threatening to Abraham, even though in Genesis, He invited them into his tent, washed their feet, and made them welcome. It was at that point in time when Sarah Laughed at the prospect of her impending Pregnancy, thus giving Isaac his name (Laughter!)
Then they LEFT OUT the most beautiful, redemptive , and inspiring story in the entire Torah, the Story of Joseph! How Could they leave THAT ONE OUT? Without the story of Joseph, there would be NO Book of Exodus at all!
They showed the children of Israel getting extremely WET as they crossed the Red Sea, yet the Bible says they walked through on DRY land.
The Entire Book of Genesis (With NOTHING left out, even Dinah’s and Tamar’s Stories are in there...eek!) was produced several years ago by the Genesis Project. It was four hours long and I watched every second of it in rapt attention. Martin Landau played Abraham, and he was magnificent. The separate stories have been broken up into smaller films and are all available on Netflix.
I was so un-edified by this poorly made revisionist junk that I read My Bible for about a half hour and came back refreshed and ready for a new day.
I tend to agree with you. It was not deep theology, It was a skimming of the OT. Some people might be spurred to do a real Bible study from elements of the film. I didn’t see any of the usual History Channel Heresy and blasphemy. It was a simple view of the old testament with a Willie Nelson look-a-like playing Moses.
If Christian Science Monitor hates it, that’s about all that’s needed to convince me to watch it.
>> I think that if you’re not willing to let your elementary-school child watch “300” and the “Twilight” series you should steer clear of this as a family viewing session. <<
Really? Context means nothing? Violent depictions promoting Satanism and teens having sex (Twilight) are on a par with violent depictions showing the courage of believers in God?
Haven’t watched it. But I bet it will get more people looking in to what the Bible actually says more than anything done since The Passion of the Christ.
That’s not a bad thing IMO.
The Bible itself moves along quickly and further on we find a few remarks about characters that were in the early part. The point being ... the Bible itself jumps quickly with a (bare outline) often being vague in the telling. It is one of the reasons it takes a serious student to learn of ever deeper knowledge of the LORD God. It is there but it takes time and attention to find. At least it is my experience. It is one of the reasons there are so many differences in understanding and truths. Even today major denomanations differ on understanding.
It is interesting how bare the essentials are being related in this story of the Bible.
Very like the way the Bible presents these stories. MO
Of course, that is how St. Micheal is often depicted, so I can see why.
Don't know how it will play out. I can understand the glossing over Sodom. How do you play anal rape, incest, and a father giving his daughter over to be raped to death and keep you PG13 rating?
It is a starting point for a discussion.
A quick story:
Worked with a guy (now retired) who was in an airport with his wife many years ago, when they saw Charton Heston walking toward them - his wife couldn't get the name out so she blurted out: "Look, there's Moses"!
Mr. Heston just gave a quite couteous smile and a wink and walked by.
With History’s record of false Bible and Christian programming, I did not watch it. Now I am glad I didn’t. Thanks for letting us know about it. I simply do not watch the garbage on these channels.
I saw it for a while last night. I really increased my appreciation of Charlton Heston.
I had quickly turned it on and was still focused on getting settled down to watch when I thought I heard Sean Connery. I had to look close to realize it wasn't Connery and was puzzled why Noah would be Scottish. The show went downhill from there. I was determined to watch but had to turn the channel after an hour. I don't care for Roma Downey because of her being so mamsy pamsy but thought with Mark Burnett involved it would at least have decent editing and production but it was a failure for me.
Overall, I thought it was good. Expecting some “cultural massaging”, I noticed only minor concerns that, in the end didn’t change the “message”.
I was waiting for the asian angel to call the black angel “Michael”. It was good to see some fidelity to “typology” though. (A ^trinity^ of visitors to Abraham and only 2 visitors to S&G.)
I’ll continue to catch futher episodes and pick up when it is re-broadcast (or flees, screaming to NetFlix).
Song of Solomon would be x-rated
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.