Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spacedOut · 08-05-2003, 09:54 AM

Anyone else see Bill's lead story last night on the Factor? Apparently Mel Gibson is receiving heat from the NYT that his new passion film about Jesus of Nazareth is anti-semitic (of course the NYT columnist hasn't actually seen the movie, but I digress).

Anyway, during the discussion I was somewhat surprised at a statement made by Bill. While he agreed that the gospel accounts of Jesus could not be taken as history, he implied (on more than one occasion) that he felt the accounts of Josephus and Tacitus should be considered as historically reliable. Now I know Bill is a good Catholic and all, but his opinion still surprised me given the clear evidence (IMO) that the Josephus account of Jesus was added (by a Christian) at a later time, and that the Tacitus account seems to be a rehash of a common legend of the day (he doesn't mention Jesus by name).

Maybe it's just me, but it seemed an odd position for a "No Spin" kind of guy...

Doctor X · 08-05-2003, 10:06 AM

This has been discussed a great deal over at BC&H--Tacitus and Josephus.

Someone should tell him he is wrong. Unfortunately, I doubt that he will listen to members of an internet forum unless someone has a lot of academic credentials.

--J.D.

Arken · 08-05-2003, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spacedOut
Maybe it's just me, but it seemed an odd position for a "No Spin" kind of guy...

Welcome to virtually every position Bill O'Rilley ever takes.

Godless Sodomite · 08-05-2003, 01:09 PM

Speaking of Bill O'Reilly, was anyone aware of today's National Prayer Day?

National Prayer Day

OK everyone, on your knees!

-Jerry

sensate · 08-05-2003, 07:02 PM

If you had bothered to read the NYT article you would see part of the complaint against Gibson's is that only a select few are being shown the film. The NYT reporter was denied from seeing the film as are many people of the Jewish faith and people from the NYT.

People have made claims that the film could be anti-semetic because of the script which had been leaked. Gibson has claimed that changes were made in shooting the film but isn't letting certain people see for them selves at this time.

The NYT article makes the case that Gibson is making premptive strikes against possible critics who simply want to see the film.

08-05-2003, 09:54 AM	#1
spacedOut Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Heart of Dixie Posts: 104	Bill O'Reilly Anyone else see Bill's lead story last night on the Factor? Apparently Mel Gibson is receiving heat from the NYT that his new passion film about Jesus of Nazareth is anti-semitic (of course the NYT columnist hasn't actually seen the movie, but I digress). Anyway, during the discussion I was somewhat surprised at a statement made by Bill. While he agreed that the gospel accounts of Jesus could not be taken as history, he implied (on more than one occasion) that he felt the accounts of Josephus and Tacitus should be considered as historically reliable. Now I know Bill is a good Catholic and all, but his opinion still surprised me given the clear evidence (IMO) that the Josephus account of Jesus was added (by a Christian) at a later time, and that the Tacitus account seems to be a rehash of a common legend of the day (he doesn't mention Jesus by name). Maybe it's just me, but it seemed an odd position for a "No Spin" kind of guy...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2003, 10:06 AM	#2
Doctor X Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,794	This has been discussed a great deal over at BC&H--Tacitus and Josephus. Someone should tell him he is wrong. Unfortunately, I doubt that he will listen to members of an internet forum unless someone has a lot of academic credentials. --J.D.

08-05-2003, 01:09 PM	#4
Godless Sodomite Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: New York Posts: 453	Speaking of Bill O'Reilly, was anyone aware of today's National Prayer Day? National Prayer Day OK everyone, on your knees! -Jerry

08-05-2003, 07:02 PM	#5
sensate Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: midwest Posts: 438	If you had bothered to read the NYT article you would see part of the complaint against Gibson's is that only a select few are being shown the film. The NYT reporter was denied from seeing the film as are many people of the Jewish faith and people from the NYT. People have made claims that the film could be anti-semetic because of the script which had been leaked. Gibson has claimed that changes were made in shooting the film but isn't letting certain people see for them selves at this time. The NYT article makes the case that Gibson is making premptive strikes against possible critics who simply want to see the film.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.