Ah, another reason I haven't had TV since I moved out of my parents house, award shows blow.

I quite agree that you can always vote with your feet and not go to see a movie. (I have said the same thing when some people complain about offensive posts on this BB). The problem is that many of the people who do see the movie will believe the stereotypes and historical distortions that they see, and it will perpetuate religious bigotry.

Remember Oliver Stone's stupid movie about the Kennedy assasination? It is full of "facts" that are completely false (e.g, how many bullets you can fire in X seconds, etc.). But I would assume that many thousands of viewers trust what they saw and heard, and now believe that there actually was a plot and cover up, etc.

I am not saying that movie producers have an ethical obligation not to misrepresent history (who would decide?), any more than politicians should have an obligation to make promises they won't keep (perhaps we should be thankful they don't keep their promises).

Somewhat tangentially, Leni Reifenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" was a _great_ movie, so maybe we should judge Gibson by whether the movie is artistically good and not by the ideological rubbish he is propounding.

Please do not equate the Bible with history or as a factual depiction of events. There is very little evidence (if any) that such is the case.

Ah ha! Now we're getting to the heart of the subject!

So, is the bible nothing more than a story? Just a bunch of good storytellers getting together around the campfire or ol' slab of rock to spin a yarn about some guy with visions that are deemed holy?

If so, this movie we're talking about has no credible substance. Or, as someone mentioned of Oliver Stone's JFK movie, about as much credible substance.

Jews, Catholics, British, Nazis... I'm very uncomfortable with all this talk.

Can't we just pick on the French?

That might be your opinion but the facts prove otherwise.

Facts? FACTS???!

Show me solid evidence.

You guys are drifting into territory that I won't even touch. :D

Trust me, there is no winning, (or losing), these arguments. It is fruitless and people just get hurt, period. :cool:

Fair enough. Consider my comments retracted.

Sorry to hear that. I think a topic like this is too important for people to be afraid of it.

As far as "hurt," I don't believe that. Anyone resolved to their beliefs can never be "hurt." Belief is too strong.

I agree with you, dd74. And I also trust speeder's judgement that there is no winning or losing. But there are benefits to argument, debate, discussion that make doing it worthwhile. Exchanging ideas and expressing points of view gives the opportunity for others to examine not only the thought expressed, but their own as well.

Or, you can all just agree to disagree. Darn me to heck!

Ed

Frankly, dd, I just don't have the energy or the time to really devote the effort a subject like this requires. Besides, I'd end up just rehashing arguments I've had many times before. It gets boring when people actively pull the wool over their own eyes.

I actually enjoy the study of religions...my favorite class in uni was "Indian Buddhism". Well...next to "Design and Analysis of Simulated Systems" and "Probability and Random Signals".

Well, in addition to numerous theories that movie was also filled with dramatized representation of many facts.

Even if you don't like Stone's spin of the events leading to Kennedy's assasination the House Select Asssassinations
Committee in the 70s re-examined the known events including evidence such as audio recordings of the shots that rang out that day to determine with better than 99 percent scientific accuracy that there was more than one shooter in that plaza that day (as numerous witnesses including police officers attested to).

Believe what you want but more than one shooter, a likely patsy, the killing the killers and an obvious cover up points to conspiracy any way you cut it.

Sorry to get off topic but I just felt the need to respond to that other off topic paragraph.

Ironic that Kennedy comes up. The History Channel is airing a film that states Lyndon Johnson, Nixon and Hoover plotted together and killed Kennedy.

The film is called "The Guilty Men."

Hmmm...

Whether its presidendential coups or presidents sleeping with movie stars its interesting how much of what is initially dismissed as 'loony conspiracy theories' is eventually revealed to be historical fact.

I think Kennedy's historical legacy will be that its not wise to piss off the CIA, FBI and organized crime (and its interesting how much crossover there is between those organizations) at the same time.

ah, but one thing that all of you are forgetting is that...

damn, now I forgot!

Books to consider looking at to convince you (from an intellectual point of view) that the Bible was History and also the miraculous events also occurred:

1) "Who moved the stone?" by Frank Morison - Former athiest intellectual who became a Christian believer. This book focuses primarily on the latter part of Christ's life.

2) "That Manuscript from Outer Space" by I-can't-remember-who.

3) "Evidence that Demands a Verdict (I & II)" by Josh McDowell.

In the end, after all the "Head Work", the decision to believe is a "Heart Decision".

On a separate topic, I believe that the primary audience for this movie will be already Christian, or people seeking. I can speak for every church I've been a member of: The Christian community is generally supportive of Jews and the current Jewish homeland, Israel. Christianity is into foregiveness, so I cannot see anger from this being directed at current-day Jews.

I don't mean to debate or criticize because that just makes people mad. I believe the story behind the movie and I believe the Bible is God's inspired word given to mankind to lead men to salvation and help them live their lives here on earth. If what I believe is right, the reward is heaven.

ah, the good old days. (insert whistfully reminiscing smiley here)