What The Hell? "The Bible" Series' Satan looks like Obama...

[Choronzon]

History Channel and the creators of the show have both spoken out and said that this comparison is absurd, and that this actor is a well known actor who has played this kind of role many times. The creators of the show are apparently Obama fans.

So, this little nonissue is over as far as I'm concerned.

[New Rogernomics]

Perhaps someone in the history channel was having an in-joke, by portraying the devil as a black African; who looks like Obama. Either that, or racism is still an issue among broadcasters in the US.

[Choronzon]

Perhaps someone in the history channel was having an in-joke, by portraying the devil as a black African; who looks like Obama. Either that, or racism is still an issue among broadcasters in the US.

Or, considering a lot (all?) of the Bible stories happened in that general region (North Africa and the Middle East), they got someone who was the appropriate ethnicity. What, you think Satan would manifest as a Scandinavian when corrupting people in the Middle East in ancient times?

Also:

History Channel and the creators of the show have both spoken out and said that this comparison is absurd, and that this actor is a well known actor who has played this kind of role many times. The creators of the show are apparently Obama fans.

So, this little nonissue is over as far as I'm concerned.

You could have, at the very least, read the post above yours.

[New Rogernomics]

Perhaps someone in the history channel was having an in-joke, by portraying the devil as a black African; who looks like Obama. Either that, or racism is still an issue among broadcasters in the US.

Or, considering a lot (all?) of the Bible stories happened in that general region (North Africa and the Middle East), they got someone who was the appropriate ethnicity. What, you think Satan would manifest as a Scandinavian when corrupting people in the Middle East in ancient times?

Also:

History Channel and the creators of the show have both spoken out and said that this comparison is absurd, and that this actor is a well known actor who has played this kind of role many times. The creators of the show are apparently Obama fans.

So, this little nonissue is over as far as I'm concerned.

You could have, at the very least, read the post above yours.

There is no evidence that an African called 'Satan' existed back then, if I was Christian I would have an objection to having Satan portrayed at all. Edit: Also you don't have to read every single post in the topic in order to reply.

[Genivaria]

Why they're even a bible series in the first place is beyond me.

Because it's history????

No it isn't, it would be like calling the Odyssey history.

[Abatael]

Because it's history????

No it isn't, it would be like calling the Odyssey history.

Whether you believe in the Holy Bible or not, you cannot deny accurately that the Holy Bible is historically significant.

Edit: This has nothing to do with the historicity of the Holy Bible. It is, regardless of historicity, historically significant.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Because it's history????

No it isn't, it would be like calling the Odyssey history.

Which isn't completely inappropriate. The stories in the Odyssey and Illiad are obviously exaggerated. However, reputable historians of Ancient Greece such as Donald Kagan believe they provide insight into the political history and social structure of a period in Greek history during and in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Mycenian civilisation.

The Bible has similar historical value.

Well, not that the History Channels cares much about historical value, let alone history itself but there we go.

[Genivaria]

No it isn't, it would be like calling the Odyssey history.

Which isn't completely inappropriate. The stories in the Odyssey and Illiad are obviously exaggerated. However, reputable historians of Ancient Greece such as Donald Kagan believe they provide insight into the political history and social structure of a period in Greek history during and in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Mycenian civilisation.

The Bible has similar historical value.

Well, not that the History Channels cares much about historical value, let alone history itself but there we go.

That's actually why I used the Odyssey instead of something completely made up like LOTR.

[Saiwania]

Satan's back story is that he was the highest and most beautiful of all angels as Lucifer, but he was cast out of Heaven for rebelling against God and believing himself to be superior. So if Satan can take any physical form, it is hard for any Bible production to decide on just what Satan should look like. It has to look magnificent yet also have an evil aura.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Which isn't completely inappropriate. The stories in the Odyssey and Illiad are obviously exaggerated. However, reputable historians of Ancient Greece such as Donald Kagan believe they provide insight into the political history and social structure of a period in Greek history during and in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Mycenian civilisation.

The Bible has similar historical value.

Well, not that the History Channels cares much about historical value, let alone history itself but there we go.

That's actually why I used the Odyssey instead of something completely made up like LOTR.

So why is it inappropriate to have a bible series as part of a history program (I know, I know, it's the 'History' Channel we're talking about here but indulge me)?

The Iliad and Odyssey are historically significant for helping us learn about the late Mycenian or Greek Dark ages (depending on where the dating is placed) and the stories contained therein were of enormous importance in shaping the cultural framework of Classical Greek civilisation. I don't think there'd be anything wrong with portraying and elucidating on the context of these stories as part of a history program.

Likewise, the Bible has some use both as a historical source for the periods in which it was written and as a source to help us understand the subsequent history and course of Western civilisation. So what's wrong with a bible series?

[Meryuma]

Looking up this Bible series, I'm more bothered by the fact that they made Satan a dark-skinned Arab but made Jesus and Moses fair-skinned and European-looking.

[Abatael]

Looking up this Bible series, I'm more bothered by the fact that they made Satan a dark-skinned Arab but made Jesus and Moses fair-skinned and European-looking.

So the fuck what?

[Trollgaard]

I find this hilarious.

[Freiheit Reich]

Looking up this Bible series, I'm more bothered by the fact that they made Satan a dark-skinned Arab but made Jesus and Moses fair-skinned and European-looking.

If you lived in Hell, your skin would be darker also. A great place to go for a tan.

[Meryuma]

Looking up this Bible series, I'm more bothered by the fact that they made Satan a dark-skinned Arab but made Jesus and Moses fair-skinned and European-looking.

So the fuck what?

So it's inconsistent in its commitment to ethnic accuracy in a way that has unfortunate implications, even if the intentions were completely innocent. When you consider the amount of prejudice against Arabs in the modern West it's just a bad move.

[Abatael]

So the fuck what?

So it's inconsistent in its commitment to ethnic accuracy in a way that has unfortunate implications, even if the intentions were completely innocent. When you consider the amount of prejudice against Arabs in the modern West it's just a bad move.

He's not even dark, so it looks accurate to me.

[TaQud]

So it's inconsistent in its commitment to ethnic accuracy in a way that has unfortunate implications, even if the intentions were completely innocent. When you consider the amount of prejudice against Arabs in the modern West it's just a bad move.

He's not even dark,

could be the lighting... (just giving a suggestion)

[The Emerald Dawn]

Perhaps someone in the history channel was having an in-joke, by portraying the devil as a black African; who looks like Obama. Either that, or racism is still an issue among broadcasters in the US.

Or, considering a lot (all?) of the Bible stories happened in that general region (North Africa and the Middle East), they got someone who was the appropriate ethnicity. What, you think Satan would manifest as a Scandinavian when corrupting people in the Middle East in ancient times?

Also:

History Channel and the creators of the show have both spoken out and said that this comparison is absurd, and that this actor is a well known actor who has played this kind of role many times. The creators of the show are apparently Obama fans.

So, this little nonissue is over as far as I'm concerned.

You could have, at the very least, read the post above yours.

Wait wait wait. You people spend all this time telling us that we white people are the "Great Satan" and you're telling me that Helel wasn't even a cracker?

That's some shit, yo.

[Choronzon]

There is no evidence that an African called 'Satan' existed back then,

That has fuck all to do with anything. Seriously.

If you're going to manifest as a mortal to tempt souls away from God you're going to try and blend in. You're not going to go to the Middle East as a white guy at a time when those two cultures had no contact.

if I was Christian I would have an objection to having Satan portrayed at all.

Thats nice. Thats also completely irrelvant, unless all you want to do is bitch about something.

Which it sort of seems like thats your whole goal.

Edit: Also you don't have to read every single post in the topic in order to reply.

No, but you can read the one literally right above yours.

[Novaya Tselinoyarsk]

I don't see it at all, they're two completely different people.

[Genivaria]

That's actually why I used the Odyssey instead of something completely made up like LOTR.

So why is it inappropriate to have a bible series as part of a history program (I know, I know, it's the 'History' Channel we're talking about here but indulge me)?

The Iliad and Odyssey are historically significant for helping us learn about the late Mycenian or Greek Dark ages (depending on where the dating is placed) and the stories contained therein were of enormous importance in shaping the cultural framework of Classical Greek civilisation. I don't think there'd be anything wrong with portraying and elucidating on the context of these stories as part of a history program.

Likewise, the Bible has some use both as a historical source for the periods in which it was written and as a source to help us understand the subsequent history and course of Western civilisation. So what's wrong with a bible series?

Hmm, a fair point I suppose.
I DO think that they should make sure to emphasis exactly what is fact and what is myth, having not watched this series I am unaware if they do.

[Cocsoah]

Unintentional, but that still doesn't mean Obama isn't a satanist...

[Liriena]

It's the "History" Channel...what did you expect? They spent 6 years saying that Saddam Hussein was the Antichrist, then it was Bin Laden, then it was the next President of the US (a youthful, charismatic politician with dark skin and short black hair). In 2016, the Antichrist will be a politically savvy, slightly elderly blonde woman.

[Liriena]

Unintentional, but that still doesn't mean Obama isn't a satanist...

Satanist-muslim-atheist-gay-communist-fascist-liberal-pacifist-zionist-anti-Israel bastard!

[Cerantia]

I didn't say everything was right, did I? No, I just pointed out what was right in the book. I imagine the Bible is a like a movie based on a true story. Sure, they got the basics right, but they embellished when it sounded cool.

Think of Argo, add a little bit of Star Wars, just a dash of The Day After Tomorrow and some 17 Again. That's the Bible.

....

B-but....

No. No. Not 17 Again. God, no. It at least sounded cool until you said that. Please. No. D: