Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Entertainment
Movies on the Early Church
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rakovsky" data-source="post: 73459789" data-attributes="member: 31810"><p><strong>Thanks for replying, Dave.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p>44 minutes into the 3rd episode about the Apostles in the series <strong><strong><em>Ancient Roads from Christ to Constantine</em></strong>, </strong> a professor says that normally under Roman standard practice, the Roman Magistrate would have given Paul a chance to run away to avoid being executed but that Nero prevented this from occurring by saying that accepting Christianity was enough of a crime for a death sentence. <strong><strong>What Roman standard practice about magistrates letting people run away is he talking about?</strong></strong></p><p></p><p>At the beginning of Episode 4 in <strong>Ancient Roads: From Christ to Constantine</strong>, the narrator says that Jewish Christians were involved in the fight against Rome in c. 70 AD. Nowhere in Josephus' narrative about the revolt do I find this claimed, <strong>so where did the narrator get the idea that Christians of Jewish heritage were revolting against Rome along with the known rebels?</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p>In the 2001 Polish movie <strong>Quo Vadis / Kamo Gryadeshi</strong>, the betrayer of the Christians repents and gets baptized by Paul, and if I understand the movie correctly, it's the third time that the traitor is baptized because he kept falling into sin. This is at 1 hour 49 minutes into the Russian-dubbed version (<a href="https://ok.ru/video/265705884277" target="_blank">Камо Грядеши? / Quo Vadis (2001)</a>). How could there be such a thing as a third baptism, even if the baptised person was insincere (eg. as a traitor) in the first two times?</p><p></p><p>The movie ends with Peter saying to his companion that they are going back to Rome, and it then shows them walking towards modern day Rome. <strong>I wondered if there was supposed to be some inner meaning hinted at when they showed modern Rome.</strong> Maybe they just mean that it's the same city in some ways many centuries later.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rakovsky, post: 73459789, member: 31810"] [B]Thanks for replying, Dave. [/B] 44 minutes into the 3rd episode about the Apostles in the series [B][B][I]Ancient Roads from Christ to Constantine[/I][/B], [/B] a professor says that normally under Roman standard practice, the Roman Magistrate would have given Paul a chance to run away to avoid being executed but that Nero prevented this from occurring by saying that accepting Christianity was enough of a crime for a death sentence. [B][B]What Roman standard practice about magistrates letting people run away is he talking about?[/B][/B] At the beginning of Episode 4 in [B]Ancient Roads: From Christ to Constantine[/B], the narrator says that Jewish Christians were involved in the fight against Rome in c. 70 AD. Nowhere in Josephus' narrative about the revolt do I find this claimed, [B]so where did the narrator get the idea that Christians of Jewish heritage were revolting against Rome along with the known rebels? [/B] In the 2001 Polish movie [B]Quo Vadis / Kamo Gryadeshi[/B], the betrayer of the Christians repents and gets baptized by Paul, and if I understand the movie correctly, it's the third time that the traitor is baptized because he kept falling into sin. This is at 1 hour 49 minutes into the Russian-dubbed version ([URL="https://ok.ru/video/265705884277"]Камо Грядеши? / Quo Vadis (2001)[/URL]). How could there be such a thing as a third baptism, even if the baptised person was insincere (eg. as a traitor) in the first two times? The movie ends with Peter saying to his companion that they are going back to Rome, and it then shows them walking towards modern day Rome. [B]I wondered if there was supposed to be some inner meaning hinted at when they showed modern Rome.[/B] Maybe they just mean that it's the same city in some ways many centuries later. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Entertainment
Movies on the Early Church
Top
Bottom