About the new Son of God movie, beware.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

Qnts2 hath said:

 

"The gospel went first to the Jewish people, and all of the apostles were Jewish. At the time this actually occurred it was a Jewish fight between Jewish people, discussing differences in interpretation of scripture, "

 

How do you know that?  We not wrestle vs flesh & blood but vs principalities & powers.  Would it  not be better to say that the fight was between Believers in Jesus (who were predominantly Jewish at first) and satan?

While I won't argue that it was Satan warring against the believers, the claim that the Believers in Jesus were predominantly Jewish at first is rather odd.

The original believers were all Jewish!

The ~120 in the Upper Room on Pentecost were all Jewish.

The 3000 who were added to their numbers that day were all Jewish.

It was not until some unknown time later when Peter went to Cornelius that we began seeing Gentiles added into the faith.

Unless you read things differently in Acts?

 

Well, Neb, let us not strain at gnats here.  They were predominately Jewish.  Now let us have you quote a verse that says they were ALL Jewish, with no exceptions.

 

What about the gentile about whom the Lord Jesus said He had not seen so great faith in Israel?  What about the SyroPhoenician woman who said that the doggies could pick up scraps?  What about the Greeks who said, "Sirs, we would see Jesus."  I don't know any way to prove that no single Gentile believed.

 

they were not predominately Jewish.  All of the first converts were Jewish.   The people who you mention are said to have believed on Jesus for salvation.  They recognized Him as a prophet, not as a Messiah.  There is no record of them of trusting Jesus as Savior.  You can try to pencil that in if you wish, but it simply isn't there.

 

God had to prod the Jewish believers to include the Gentiles.  They had to be pushed out into the nonJewish world.  Peter was sent to Cornelius' house and it was after they got saved that Peter understood that the Gospel was for the Gentiles as well.   That was a revelation.

 

One thing we miss is that the first century, Gentile salvation was a mystery.  It was a mysterty how uncircumcised Gentiles could qualify to enter the Kingdom of God.  This, to the apostles was not the start of a new religion.  They clearly saw Jesus as the fulfillmetn of their prophets and all of the hopes and dreams of the Jewish people for the coming of the Messiah to Israel.  

[EnochBethany]

 

 

 

Qnts2 hath said:

 

"The gospel went first to the Jewish people, and all of the apostles were Jewish. At the time this actually occurred it was a Jewish fight between Jewish people, discussing differences in interpretation of scripture, "

 

How do you know that?  We not wrestle vs flesh & blood but vs principalities & powers.  Would it  not be better to say that the fight was between Believers in Jesus (who were predominantly Jewish at first) and satan?

While I won't argue that it was Satan warring against the believers, the claim that the Believers in Jesus were predominantly Jewish at first is rather odd.

The original believers were all Jewish!

The ~120 in the Upper Room on Pentecost were all Jewish.

The 3000 who were added to their numbers that day were all Jewish.

It was not until some unknown time later when Peter went to Cornelius that we began seeing Gentiles added into the faith.

Unless you read things differently in Acts?

 

Well, Neb, let us not strain at gnats here.  They were predominately Jewish.  Now let us have you quote a verse that says they were ALL Jewish, with no exceptions.

 

What about the gentile about whom the Lord Jesus said He had not seen so great faith in Israel?  What about the SyroPhoenician woman who said that the doggies could pick up scraps?  What about the Greeks who said, "Sirs, we would see Jesus."  I don't know any way to prove that no single Gentile believed.

 

they were not predominately Jewish.  All of the first converts were Jewish.   The people who you mention are said to have believed on Jesus for salvation.  They recognized Him as a prophet, not as a Messiah.  There is no record of them of trusting Jesus as Savior.  You can try to pencil that in if you wish, but it simply isn't there.

 

God had to prod the Jewish believers to include the Gentiles.  They had to be pushed out into the nonJewish world.  Peter was sent to Cornelius' house and it was after they got saved that Peter understood that the Gospel was for the Gentiles as well.   That was a revelation.

 

One thing we miss is that the first century, Gentile salvation was a mystery.  It was a mysterty how uncircumcised Gentiles could qualify to enter the Kingdom of God.  This, to the apostles was not the start of a new religion.  They clearly saw Jesus as the fulfillmetn of their prophets and all of the hopes and dreams of the Jewish people for the coming of the Messiah to Israel.  

 

So your focus is on the word "Messiah."  Now how are you going to prove that the few Gentiles who believed did not accept that the Lord Jesus was the "anointed one" promised to come to save Israel?  Unless you have scripture, how are you going to prove your ALL claim?  Leave it at predominantly.  How can one believe in Jesus and not be a convert?  Don't pencil in ALL where it does not occur in the text.

 

Thou sayest, "One thing we miss is that the first century, Gentile salvation was a mystery."

 

Well speak for yourself if you wish.  I don't miss that the Church was a mystery.

 

New religion?  I don't like to call the worship of YHWH a religion.  No, the apostles did not think of the message of the Lord Jesus, nor the prophecy after Pentecost as a one of the religions, like worship of Jupiter.  And yes, we see erroneous mentality in some of the Jewish believers in the early Church. The transition from Israel to Church took some progress in their minds.  Of course the mentality of the early Jewish believers is a different matter from what the Word reveals about Israel & the Church. 

 

The apostles are famous for being obtuse, but they should have realized from Mat 16 that something new was coming when the Lord said in future tense, I will build my Church.  And the Lord Jesus taught them that change was coming in the Discourse in John that precedes the Last Supper.  But I think they probably did not altogether get it, even after 40 days post-resurrection teaching.   Even in Acts 1 they were asking about Israel's kingdom.

 

Of course believers are still debating the continuity vs discontinuity between Israel & the Church.  The Church falls in a gap in Israel's 70 weeks history.  The 69th week ended & the 70th has not yet begun.  The Church was a mystery.

[EnochBethany]

 

Well, Neb, let us not strain at gnats here.  They were predominately Jewish.  Now let us have you quote a verse that says they were ALL Jewish, with no exceptions.

 

What about the gentile about whom the Lord Jesus said He had not seen so great faith in Israel?  What about the SyroPhoenician woman who said that the doggies could pick up scraps?  What about the Greeks who said, "Sirs, we would see Jesus."  I don't know any way to prove that no single Gentile believed.

 

I see your point, but there is no record of them having heard the Gospel of salvation and being included in "the number" with the disciples and others.

 

ITA.  The first Church was populated by Jews.  James speaks of synagogues, not church buildings.

[rollinTHUNDER]

I saw "Son of God" last weekend. This movie is based on the Bible, but it is far from biblical. Twisted Scripture is not the truth.

Cheers

[MorningGlory]

I saw "Son of God" last weekend. This movie is based on the Bible, but it is far from biblical. Twisted Scripture is not the truth.

Cheers

 

Once again the subject of the thread has been lost so it's good to hear from someone who has actually SEEN the movie.  Thanks for the review, R.T.; I doubt that I will go to see this movie now.

[Fez]

I would be interested to see it, just to make my own mind up about it. The danger of non believers seeing it is that they will start believing it as truth. If we see it ourselves we can better point out the inconsistencies? 

[rollinTHUNDER]

Just posted my review on facebook:

My Review: A heads-up/warning about the "Son of God" movie

I'm not going to beat around the bush. This movie is based on the Bible, but it is far from biblical. Twisted scripture is not the truth. There were several scenes that they added things that are not in the Bible. And likewise, several scenes were missing things that are in the Bible.

Don't get me wrong, many people are going to like this movie. The acting and visual effects were very good. Some people were applauding some of the scenes and it received a mini-standing ovation at the conclusion. This is the result of people not being very familiar with God's Word. But those who really know their Bible's, they will know that you can not improve on perfection.

Bottom-line - I was highly disappointed and would not recommend this movie to anyone. It reminds me of the warning Christ gave in Revelation:

Revelation 22:18-19

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book; (19) if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

[Fez]

Do you think this movie could bring someone to know Jesus, even if it is only loosely based on scripture? Could it be the first step? Or will it turn more people away (unbelievers I mean?)

[ayin jade]

Do you think this movie could bring someone to know Jesus, even if it is only loosely based on scripture? Could it be the first step? Or will it turn more people away (unbelievers I mean?)

 

God can use anything to bring someone to Him. It could be in a discussion of how it differs from the biblical account that an unbeliever could be led to Christ. But I havent seen the film so I dont know lol.

[OldSchool2]

Just posted my review on facebook:

My Review: A heads-up/warning about the "Son of God" movie

I'm not going to beat around the bush. This movie is based on the Bible, but it is far from biblical. Twisted scripture is not the truth. There were several scenes that they added things that are not in the Bible. And likewise, several scenes were missing things that are in the Bible.

Don't get me wrong, many people are going to like this movie ...

Many of them already liked it: "Son of God" is an edited compilation of several episodes from Mark Burnett/Roma Downey's highly rated History Channel miniseries, "The Bible".