A.D. (on NBC)-character of Boaz-real or fiction

In the last two episodes of the show AD on NBC, there is the story of Boaz who killed a Roman soldier, and in turn, Pilate had crucified 10 Jews everyday until he was found.

Is the character or story of Boaz a true event or was it an added fiction to the story line?

Anyway, just wondering.

I vote fiction.

If I’m reading Google’s search results correctly, no document mentions such a person in the last 65 years. The first time a Jewish Boaz is mentioned on the internet who is connected to 10 Jews dying every day is in April 2015, shortly after the episode you mention came out.

I figure if he was a real dude his story would have been at least mentioned in some document from the last 65 years. Lots has been written in that time about Jewish history in the first century, and I don’t think a story like that would be completely unmentioned in all the documents from the last 65 years that have made it on the internet.

Therefore, I vote fiction. I hope that helps.

The only mention of a “Boaz” in the New Testament is in the genealogies of Matthew and Luke as King David’s great-grandfather. There is no New Testament figure named Boaz. He is a fictitious addition to the series (as are characters like Peter’s daughter and others).

I find it hard to believe that a grown Jewish man wasn’t married or had no children. Peter’s daughter might be an extrapolation but she not a baseless work of fiction unlike Boaz whose purpose in the story is to explain the cruelty of Pilot. (blessed spellcheck:mad:) Pilot was so cruel, he disgusted Romans and was recalled to Rome to be held to account for his actions. He did not need a ‘‘Boaz’’ to inflict torment on the people.

I recommend the Catholic Viewers guide for this show, published by Sophia Insitute Press.

You can by it (and the other book) here:

astore.amazon.com/catholicriten-20?_encoding=UTF8&node=88

God Bless!

Thanks, that is what I thought, that the story is fictional.

Now I see the point of the Boaz story. Thanks for this persepective.

Is this the reason Pilate was recalled to Rome, because of his cruelty on the Jews?

Approximately what year was he recalled, if you have an idea, after the crucifixion.

Thanks, I will check it out.

Pilate was an equal opportunity sadist. He was recalled because his management style fomented insurrection where ever he went.

Boas was an ancestor of King David, so they have their era messed up.

It’s just a fictional character with the same name. That guy is nothing like the Boaz of the Ruth story.

The “Boaz” storyline I just chalked up to creative license, but the series as a whole is almost unwatchable because of all the errors and things completely left out. You’re watching and then an event happens and it jolts you because of how wrong it is. It’s not just a question of leaving some things out for brevity, but fundamentally changing so many things.

It’s a shame they had all that money and ability to produce a high quality series, and have failed miserably.

Peter’s daughter is based on the tradition of “St. Petronilla,” and other versions of the story of Peter having had a daughter who lived a holy life and was buried in Rome. I don’t think she shows up in any really early material, or even the later apocrypha; but again, there’s nothing to say she couldn’t have existed.

Anyway, the basic problem with the show is that they decided to go with Romans being evil as a counterweight to the bits of Acts where Jews do bad stuff to Christians, but the way they chose to do it has altered the storyline away from what is actually described in Acts.

The “everybody in the Church moves out into the desert” stuff is really silly.

He was recalled around AD 36. The immediate reason he was recalled to Rome was because he was very heavy-handed in putting down this movement instigated by a Samaritan prophet. Though yeah, he was cruel towards the Jews.

The Samaritan nation too was not exempt from disturbance. For a man who made light of mendacity and in all his designs catered to the mob, rallied them, bidding them go in a body with him to Mount Gerizim, which in their belief is the most sacred of mountains. He assured them that on their arrival he would show them the sacred vessels which were buried there, where Moses had deposited them.

His hearers, viewing this tale as plausible, appeared in arms. They posted themselves in a certain village named Tirathana, and, as they planned to climb the mountain in a great multitude, they welcomed to their ranks the new arrivals who kept coming.

But before they could ascend, Pilate blocked their projected route up the mountain with a detachment of cavalry and heavily armed infantry, who in an encounter with the first comers in the village slew some in a pitched battle and put the others to flight. Many prisoners were taken, of whom Pilate put to death the principal leaders and those who were most influential among the fugitives.

When the uprising had been quelled, the council of the Samaritans went to Vitellius, a man of consular rank who was governor of Syria, and charged Pilate with the slaughter of the victims. For, they said, it was not as rebels against the Romans but as refugees from the persecution of Pilate that they had met in Tirathana.

Vitellius thereupon dispatched Marcellus, one of his friends, to take charge of the administration of Judaea, and ordered Pilate to return to Rome to give the emperor his account of the matters with which he was charged by the Samaritans. And so Pilate, after having spent ten years in Judaea, hurried to Rome in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, since he could not refuse. But before he reached Rome, Tiberius had already passed away. (Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.85-89)

I haven’t really watched the series so I don’t know the context, but that’s not really an unprecedented move. Some prophetic/messianic movements back then went out into the desert (you might count John the Baptist’s movement as one here), because of all the Exodus symbolism involved. And yeah, there’s also the Community at Qumran, who basically built a settlement in the desert to remove themselves from the Hasmonean-dominated Jerusalem temple (the Hasmoneans were the dynasty founded by the Maccabees; the founders of the Qumran sect were thought to be Zadokite priests - the traditional high priestly line - who were displaced/disgusted when the Hasmoneans appointed themselves high priest-kings.)

I agree–the scene with Ananias and Sapphira was odd–since the book of Acts has Peter tell Sapphira, “…the footsteps of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” (Acts 5:9, emphasis added) “Door” implies a house, not a tent. (The bleeding from eyes, while a change from the usual nosebleed, also seemed an unneeded addition to the book of Acts and its laconic description that they dropped down dead.)

Similarly, the fact that they daily go to the Temple to pray, and several later events take place in Jerusalem–Saul’s persecution, Paul’s visit after his conversion, Peter’s visit there after Cornelius is baptized, even the Council of Jerusalem all are “in Jerusalem,” not “near Jerusalem.” Even Paul’s visit to the Church there in Acts 21 assumes they are in the city, and Paul is staying there near the temple.

This show bothers me in so many ways. I could tell it was going to be bad from day one.

  • They left out all the most important Catholic stuff. Like the apostles receiving the Holy Spirit from Jesus, like the road to Emmaus, Like Jesus calling Peter his shepherd.

  • Mary is portrayed as a washed up nutty old lady.

  • St. Stephen appeared to be a prideful nut who instigated his own death in the last show (not in the way the Bible says)

  • The show seems far more focused on the Roman and Jew conflicts than with the operation of the early Church.

  • The wives of Pilate and Caiaphas are way more cheeky than would have been tolerated in those cultures.

  • No mass conversion scene for the early Church, no speaking in tongues

I could go on. I keep watching the show, surprisingly, but at this point its just more and more disappointing.

Yep–I was particularly disappointed in the scene between Peter and Jesus at the Sea of Tiberias–for no apparent cause they switched around the dialogue, making it a mishmash, not a near ritual of reconciliation for the three denials of Peter. And the loss of the mass conversions–heck, having 3000+ Christians going out to the desert would have been just silly, I suppose, but it does present a distorted view of the Church.

Reminds me of that History Channel show–Mankind: The Story of All of Us?–in which they spoke of the Martyrs Perpetua and Felicity–but never mentioned that they belonged to any congregation or Church. Later, at the time of the Black Death, they were very explicit in mentioning that the Pope, at Avignon, was helpless against the plague. . . .

For the most recent episode, I was extremely disappointed that they missed out on what could be the most significant verse for this sequence of events:

“Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name” (Acts 5:41 RSV).

Instead, we got a sobbing Peter all upset that his daughter, nursing his wounds, wanted to go back home to Galilee.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.