The Sunday school teacher is out. Good thing a substitute is available: Satan! SATAN'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE is an animated documentary. Join Satan as he shares...
  • forty2@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8·
    11 个月前

    I watched this a handful of days ago. It’s pretty decent, and there was certainly info in there I didn’t know. Some added context to current world events

    Love how they get ahead of naysayers right up front by showing that the info being presented is known by anyone that’s been through a mainstream seminary. Then differentiating between biblical scholars and pastors.

    • thefloweracidic@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      11 个月前

      That was the biggest mindblow for me, and I really appreciate that the first biblical scholars didn’t try to bury the truth when archaeology conflicted with the bible.

    • CALIGVLA@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      24·
      11 个月前

      Yeah, they make some really good points but they never give any actual archeological evidence for any of their claims, it’s just “historians found this”, which is basically the same thing religious people do to justify their beliefs. I feel like the documentary is on the right track, but the execution is so-so.

      • OptimusPrimeDownfall@discuss.tchncs.de
        1·
        11 个月前

        I mean, they DO site their sources. It’s in the description.

        Satan has amassed an impressive list of biblical scholars ready to reveal the “standard stuff” taught in Christian seminaries: Bart Ehrman (UNC Chapel Hill), John J. Collins (Yale), Dale Allison (Princeton Seminary), Susan Niditch (Amherst), Ron Hendel (UC Berkeley), and Hector Avalos (Iowa State). This is established seminary curriculum about biblical history, biblical morals, authorship claims, and early Christianity — a curriculum never shared with the congregation.

        They even show clips of those experts reading from well-cited books like Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence or The Apocalyptic Imagination. You can go read those or others of multi-hundred page books shown if you want the definitive evidence, but in this case this wasn’t about “here’s the hard evidence”. Especially since people don’t change their minds if you present evidence like that.

        It’s supposed to consolidate information and help people start the process to questioning some things that maybe were once set in stone. Not fully change change minds or be referenced as a resource.