podcast 32 – review of the movie Son of God (2014)

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:

You're Foolin' Yourself and You Don't Believe It - Part 2

podcast 250 - Tuggy vs. Brown debate - audience Q&A

podcast 400: Debate – Tuggy vs. Bird – The New Testament Jesus is Not Divine – Part 2

podcast 380 - Dr. Dustin Smith on Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John

podcast 364 - The God who Suffers: a Response to The Reluctant Theologian Podcast 118 Why did God be...

Karl Rahner on the word "God" in the New Testament

podcast 237 - Levine and Witherington on Luke - Part 2

new co-authored paper: "Dormant Dispositions, Agent Value, and the Trinity"

podcast 316 - Review of Papandrea, Trinity 101: Father, Son, Holy Spirit

podcast 376 - The Trinity, the Deity of Christ, and the Best Craig - Part 2

1 thought on “podcast 32 – review of the movie Son of God (2014)”

Bob April 2, 2014 at 11:07 am

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.