In all fairness to O'Reilly, I don't think Christians were his target audience. However, if one person is led to read the book or see the movie, they may become interested enough in Jesus as an historical figure, to pique their curiosity and take a look at what we Christians see in Him. Kind of like that little hundredth sheep. God can make a greater good out of anything He chooses. You never know... even if one person discovers Him. Just a thought.
Had not planned to watch the movie but did, out of curiosity. If the target audience was skeptics, they will probably remain so. Not surprisingly, the focus was on the political climate at that time, including the Jewish factions. There were a few 'miracles' included - driving out a demon, healing a leper - but that was it. Why those 2? Why not the healing of the paralytic or the raising of Lazarus, both of which were accompanied by witnesses. The actor's portrayal of Jesus was more matter of fact as if Jesus himself was not sure of who he was. He admits that he intended to portray his human side rather than an other worldly one. The account was also choppy, jumping from one event to another.
Did anyone else watch the movie? What was your impression?
G2G, your post 56: “In all fairness to O’Reilly, I don’t think Christians were his target audience...even if one person discovers Him. Just a thought.”
I agree with your conclusion. Perhaps this type of presentation will cause those who are not Christians to investigate.
I saw only a couple of pieces, the argument scene of Caiphas and Nicodemus at the council was interesting even though no proof of, but possible. And I saw the ‘stoning of the prostitute’ and thought it well done, EXCEPT for the deletion of Jesus telling her “to go and sin no more” i.e. stop being a prostitute.