Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
Last night I finally saw the 2014 movie Son of God.
I’m not as down on the movie as this guy! Other reviewers point out some inaccuracies of detail. Others say it’s just too compressed.
Me, though I liked the movie, I most noticed what New Testament material they left out, as well as their familiar, confused picture of Jesus and God.
In this episode, my review, and also, some interesting listener feedback. (Got some? Upload your audio file here.)
Click on or download the mp3 file below to play. You can also here this episode on youtube.
Do you listen on itunes? Please rate the podcast here.
Here are some relevant previous posts:
- On the God-as-baby theme. (Here’s the saccharine song that ends the movie.)
- On forgiving sins.
- Two posts on Jesus in the Gospel of Mark
Finally, some other movie Jesuses:
- The Best Movie Jesus.
- Smiley Jesus.
- The Ascending on Clouds of Paper Jesus.
- The Old Standby.
- Mormon Jesus.
- Punching-bag Linebacker Jesus. (A rare safe for work scene.)
Related posts:
feedback on an argument that the New Testament is unitarian
a reading of Philippians 2:5-11
Origen on the Challenge to Jesus is God Apologists
What if God read your posts?
podcast 49 – 2 interpretations of Philippians 2 – part 2
podcast 45 - Sir Anthony Buzzard on Christian mistakes
Dealing with Apparent Contradictions: Part 12 - Rational Reinterpretation and theologians
Ehrman's misreading of John 10:30
podcast 60 – Dr. Carl Mosser on deification in the Bible
podcast 66 - Before Abraham was... what?
When you say that traditional trinitarians are agreeing with the Pharisees when they say that interpreting Jesus’ words in Mark 2 (ability to forgive sins) implies Christ’s divinity, this is inaccurate. The Pharisees by their questions are posing a syllogism:
a) If you can forgive sins you are God.
b) Jesus is not God.
c) Therefore Jesus cannot forgive sins.
Traditional trinitarians merely affirm the first premise. But you affirm the second. So both you and they are in effect “agreeing with the pharisees”. You just agree on different premises.
Comments are closed.