Sunday, March 3, 2013

Why I am not watching History Channel's "The Bible"

Part 2 here: "It sows error and confusion"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am seeing a lot of tweets and other social media discussion about the debut of the History Channel's presentation of the miniseries "The Bible."

I am not going to be watching it. I will tell you why.

First, before watching, reading, attending, or in any way absorbing anything related to the bible, it is wise to look into the background of the people who prepared the material. In our day we have the internet to look into the doctrines of the people bringing us their message. Even in the first generation church, they have heard things about certain men who bring false doctrines and evil words. (Acts 9:13, Acts 15:24). So because we have the opportunity to be Bereans ahead of time, we are.

The people putting together this production adhere to false doctrines and do not know the truth.  As Erin Benziger wrote on her blog,
"Not only, then, were seeker-driven and Word Faith pastors such as Warren, Osteen and Jakes consulted, but others of questionable convictions like Erwin McManus, Craig Groeschel, Gabe Lyons, Samuel Rodriguez and others. Time and space prevent from examining here each of these names in depth. The producers of The Bible even have consulted with Tom Peterson, founder and president of Catholics Come Home. The inclusion of Peterson is most interesting when one considers that the Roman Catholic Church preaches a false and deceptive gospel, having anathematized the true gospel as found in Scripture. The official Board of Advisors for the miniseries also includes such troubling names as Richard Mouw and Miroslav Volf. One cannot help but wonder, with the consultation and input of so many differing theological views (albeit most of them liberal), can this production actually be an accurate representation of inspired Scripture? Having viewed an extended preview (50 minutes in length) of the production, this writer would honestly like to ask the producers and consultants of this miniseries: Was the Bible itself consulted, or was this written using vague memories from stories learned in Sunday School years ago?"
Roma Downey, wife of producer Mark Burnett, plays Mary  in the mini-series, and was best known as the kind hearted angel on the long-running television program "Touched by an Angel." However, Downey's spiritual journey has taken a turn toward darkness. She openly embraces New Age and Mysticism. It is reported, "Roma also attends the University of Santa Monica, a private graduate school founded by New Age spiritual and self-help guru John-Roger, and will graduate with a master’s degree in spiritual psychology in June."

She listens to and is influenced by New Age false doctrines such as Oprah-promoted Eckart Tolle and Tony Robbins, and as she says her husband claims, "'My husband says I’m so self-realized I’m practically levitating.'"

Self-realized, but not sanctified. When she reaches for the actor playing Jesus, which Jesus is she reaching for? The Jesus of the bible, or the Gnostic/Mystical Jesus that Eckhart Tolle teaches?

With the crew behind the production seeming godly but denying its power, I wonder how much of the pure truth will be presented. Can truth spring forth clean and pure from a whitewashed tomb?

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness." (Matthew 23:27)

Another reason to avoid this production is that the makers of the series admit to "dramatizing" the events, something that in the normal world is called "exaggerating" at the least and "lying" at worst. This is OK when dramatizing a story, but the bible is not story- it is truth. It is written, "But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God." (2 Corinthians 4:2).

CNN Religion Blog reports, "They took many artistic liberties to compress the story lines while hoping to remain true to the story. A public relations manager for the project described the liberties to me as “extra-biblical but not contra-biblical.”

"Artistic liberties"? If your preacher took liberties with the bible the deacons would be having a conversation with him on Monday morning. "Hoping" to remain true? That means they know they already aren't.

Ultimately, if it is extra-biblical, it is against the bible. Anything from outside the bible and inserted in, is false because it is not from God. (2 Timothy 3:16). If it is not from the bible, it is from man. Man's philosophy is called "hollow and deceptive" according to Colossians 2:8.

Third, I'd expect the liberal New York Times to give the mini-series a pan on the basis of it being religious, but that is not the total reason. Here is part of their reasoning:
"In this heavy-handed treatment, having Jesus born in a manger is not enough; the arrival also has to occur during what looks like a typhoon. Because why have a moderate amount of hardship when you can have an excess of it? ... The feelings behind the series may be sincere — Ms. Downey has said that she and her husband “felt called to do this” — but the approach here actually shows a lack of faith in the power of the biblical stories."

"This doesn’t serve the source material — so rich in interconnections across time — very well, and it doesn’t make for very involving television. Abraham, Moses, David, Daniel and the other great biblical figures aren’t really developed in a way that illuminates them or makes them linger in our minds; they are simply called forth to perform a set piece or two. It’s like a trip through a Christian theme park. “Next stop on the tour, ladies and gentlemen: the Noah’s ark tableau, followed by the Daniel in the lion’s den diorama.”
In other words, no only has the source material been manipulated, the results aren't even that compelling, despite the dramatizations. It isn't even good tv.

Should we be grateful anyway that such a production offers us an opportunity?

Patheos acknowledges the problems with the way the bible was handled and presented in their piece, History Channel's 'The Bible'- Less Filling, Tastes Great', but they urge us to compromise. "So perhaps in this Lenten and Easter season we may be thankful for any conversation starter, however cheesy, that may give us a chance to have a richer discussion about the Bible and its riches."

Well, is Jesus a crumb and an afterthought that we are willing to grab onto because the world finally allows a sliver of a conversation about Him - on their terms? No. Did Paul say, 'well that slave girl is possessed of the devil but at least she is saying the right things. I think I'll use her as a conversation starter'? No. By the power of the Holy Spirit he ordered the demon to come out of her and he went on presenting the Gospel purely and unadulterated by any compromise (Acts 20:27). The Holy Spirit does not need the devil's help.

One thing that may help, is to imagine yourself on the couch watching the 'dramatization' of His life and His word with that big logo of the "H" on the screen, and Jesus was sitting next to you on the couch. In that case, would watching the show be edifying? Jesus-exalting? Well, the Spirit is in you, present with you always, and if you watch with your spouse then where two or more are gathered in His name, He is there also. (Matthew 18:20). So He will be with you while you watch it. How will you explain the compromise when you give an account for everything? (Romans 14:12).

Remember, this is the same channel that says evolution is truth and the big bang caused everything to come into existence from nothing. That happily teaches our children that dinosaurs roamed millions of years ago, and that archaeological data recorded through fossil dating is scientifically accurate.

There may be some people in your sphere who do watch the series, and may indeed come to you with questions. I'd take the time, rather than spend it putting something vile before your eyes, (Psalm 101:3) to instead brush up on the parts of the bible that the Spirit leads you to. Use the bible itself to witness, not a flawed and corrupt whitewashed tomb. Use the Word from the resurrected Savior, delivered by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Take the hours you'd watch the mini-series to instead study John's Gospel, or another section, Genesis 1 or Genesis 6 perhaps. Imagine how sanctifying that would be! :0 Then you'd really have some refreshed chops to speak to a person who asks you.

Psalm 119:3 says that the unrighteous walk in His ways- they do not compromise. If you know ahead of time that the people involved in the writing and scriptural oversight of this series are false, and the people acting in it are false, and you already know they messed with the word, can they really do the justice to the bible that you would want? Are you willing to absorb that?

"I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown." (Revelation 3:11)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Part 2 here: "It sows error and confusion"

58 comments:

  1. Psalm 119:3 "They also do no unrighteousness; They walk in His ways."

    ReplyDelete
  2. First command to those that want truth is.(Matthew 6:33)But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.Once you have found it.It's government on Earth.The one and only singular Church (Matthew 16:18)and come under it's governance in obedience unto baptism.Then then Holy Spirit begotten Christian has the“whole armor of God”(Eph. 6:10-18)To be able to see any error in any Biblical production,Cecil B. DeMille production or not influenced and interpreted by this World's false traditional professing Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I understand your points in some cases, but the majority of this article is saying that a mini series trying to display the Bible is wrong. I think you're looking at it from a discriminating point of view. In my opinion they were simply trying to show the Bible in a dramatic way, (the same way people have made countless biblical plays and movies about scripture) and presenting it to the public. I believe that this series could be used as a tool in order to guide people toward the written word and explore the TRUE doctrine. And by God's word then receiving Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. You sitting around and trying to point out all the negatives to me is a little over board. It is a dramatized mini series that possibly could bring many to Salvation, and in the end that's all that matters :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No that is not all that matters. If the ends justified the means, Paul would have used the demon possessed slave girl to proclaim the word. If we want to point people to true doctrine why start with corruption? Just to to the bible and point out true doctrine. or watch the Jesus movie, based entirely on speaking the word of the Gospel John wrote.

      Delete
    2. SO the history channel is wrong because they broadcast content that supports evolution- and we hold it against them. the history channel dedicates enough time for a mini series to the topic of the bible- and we hold it against them (because the doctine isn't pure enough). What can they do right then as a secular medium in your eyes? All trugh is God's truth. So all these conclusions you draw on are from your divinations of the trailer??? And you cite/reference as a source another blogger?? who cites/references very little if any first hand accounts? You doubt the faithfulness of those asked to participate...and you dont even know them?

      THRONGS of mainstream evangelical, 7 day creatiionist, innerrant written scripture, folks are recommending this movie be watched. But somehow you have found enough circumstancial evidence to support not watching it. So if anyone outside our rather narrow view of scriptural interpretation makes a movie, a mini series, a piece of prose in a periodical- and if they dont fit point by point our views we arent going to watch it, support it, recommend it...if its 80% right?? What a narrow view of God, his sovereignty.
      The people who try bring light (Jesus, the Bible) into darkness (secular culture, media, and entertainment) are not the false prophets who are to be guarded against in all cases. They shepherd no flock, no offer no claim to office of deacon, elder, bishop- they are flawed, believers trying to excersise their God given talents in a way that brings redemption to a world in need.
      (my name is brent and my email is brentgibbs@msn.com- anonymous was the only box that applies to me of the choices)

      Delete
    3. i think there is nothing wrong with this show, thank god there is some of his truth and word actually on live television, the holy spirit of god will speak for him self, even if it be threw a tv show, to change the hearts of people to come to him.

      Delete
    4. Brent, the other blogger I cited is a Christian journalist given a preview of the show.

      The people behind the show are not Christian and preach a different Gospel.

      Additions are put into the show, for example, Sarah is inserted into the scene from Genesis 22, Abraham sacrificing Isaac. It's for no reason. If they changed that,what else did they change?

      Changes are made to His word, for example, saying to both Peter and Paul at their calling and conversion, that Jesus will send them to "change the world". That is not what He said and it is not the reason we go. We are not here to change the world but to proclaim repentance and forgiveness of sins in the name of Jesus. With that little word change the Great Commission’s emphasis was altered: "proclaim Jesus to the world" vs. "change the world in [Jesus'] name". The result of the proclamation is that the world changes, but we do not go out TO change the world.

      "Throngs" are saying to watch it? I go by who is behind it and the pastors consulted are false. Can anythng good come from a whitewashed tomb? Jesus didn't think so.

      Brent, 80% right isn't good enough. 80% right means 20% corruption. Remember 2 Corinthians 4:2. 100% was the standard for Paul. (Acts 20:27). It should be the standard for us. I am not gratefully taking 20% corruption from The History Channel and saying "Thank you Sir, please may I have another."

      It is a fact that it is an over-inflated presentation of a subtly altered Word produced by people who don't know the Lord. I am not watching it, for those biblical reasons and many others which I have not written of yet.

      Delete
    5. I agree with Elizabeth, There will be no eternal fruit from this series. Period. A non-believer (which is what all the people involved in this series are)cannot be filled with the Holy Spirit, and cannot be an anointed minister of God's Word.

      Period.

      If anything this series will lead people into a "different" gospel.

      There is a satanic agenda behind this. Don't doubt it.

      Delete
    6. I agree Anonymous. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. I understand that the scenes showing the depravity of Sodom did not include ONE scene of homosexuality, the very reason the city was destroyed. It is a serious omission. It is hard enough to point out what has been inserted, (Sarah following Abraham and Isaac) tougher to detect when truth has been twisted (Ananias to Paul "you will change the world for His name's sake") but hardest of all to detect what is NOT there.

      Delete
    7. To touch on that issue, wrt 6-day creationists (not 7. No work was done on the 7th day), AiG has been far from unreservedly promoting of this series. See the most recent review, of the third episode and part of the fourth: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2013/03/23/news-to-note-03232013#five .

      The final word on the matter is far from a glowing recommendation and more condemning than praiseworthy:

      " Let us consider how we can use the interest the series generates in the Bible to open doors for the actual message of the gospel. "

      In other words, the Bible miniseries is not the ACTUAL gospel message, and our intervention, as saints, is needed to steer this ship back on course.

      The other YEC organization to do a review of the series, CMI, (creation.com) had a similar position to AiG -- it's nice that they present the miracles as having actually been supernatural, and the historical events as being actually historical, but details are confused and the theology is sadly lacking.

      If these organizations are recommending anyone watch it, they're recommending strong believers watch it so that they can correct error and use their knowledge in witnessing encounters. They are not recommending it to unbelievers; at best, they are hoping that it might incline some to search the Scriptures themselves, but no one will be saved through this miniseries because no one will arrive at a proper understanding of the message of salvation through watching it alone.

      $0.02

      Delete
  4. Where I work we have a thing called "work instructions" for the job we do. Those instructions are there for us to look at and perform our job as well as we can BASED SOLELY on those instructions. When I was a temporary/new hire I was not told, "Well we can build this product with FLASH and DASH to get peoples attention and excite them to build the product with some zest and zing, THEN train them based on what is shown the right way." Maybe its a poor example of what I'm trying to say but why sacrifice content(truth as it was written) for spectacle(truth thats full of "shock and awe")

    ReplyDelete
  5. I listened to a sermon today on 2 Peter 3. Wow! 2 Peter 3:16!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are several other key moments in the series when you come to them, where the call of Jesus upon Saul and Peter are dramatized, when Jesus speaks the scriptures, they are distorted. You are right, it is a concern.

      Delete
  6. In a day and age when we need to introduce more people to the God's love, why demonize a show that could bring more people to look towards God and his love? Find God in everything we do, and hope that others can find him, along the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because God isn't presented correctly. So, which god are they going to love?

      Delete
  7. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this Book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this Book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the Book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this Book" Revelation 22:18-19.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good scripture, Anonymous. I was disappointed they added Sarah into the Abraham and Isaac scene. There was no reason to.

      Delete
  8. I watched it and admittedly came in with suspicion. I can't expect any sort of mainstream outlet to portray such a thing with integrity and avoid sensationalism. As though the truth is any less incredible without pop culture assistance.

    I missed the first 5 minutes so if there was a creation scene and a flood, they breezed through it and went right to Abraham. Omission for brevity I can take, addition for sensationalism I could do without. Discrepancies with scripture concerning Abraham's rescue of Lot from Chedorlamer is one thing but sword wielding Samurai-type angels taking down the citizens of Sodom really sort of turned me off right away. Come on. Sword wielding angels?

    Sarah was portrayed as fairly petulant against Hagar and Ishmael for nothing more than feminine cattiness, but it wasn't as bad as the Samurai angels.

    After the Isaac non-sacrifice it leaps ahead to Moses and Egypt and the segment wasn't quite as bad as the sword wielding angels (yes that is sticking in my craw). Aside from adding an adopted-sons-revelation-of-mom's-not-really-mom, it basically recreates Cecil B. Demille's treatment, without much of the detail and ends with the introduction of Joshua as leader, the spies and Rahab, which features another scene of martial arts sword wizardry over the credits.

    To be continued…

    I didn't hate it, but I saw it's flaws and I'll tune in next week.
    -Vincent

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your input, Vincent. I had heard the production was inflated and overblown.

      I don't know why you're against sword wielding angels, when according to scripture, angels do indeed wield swords. They are powerful beings. (Genesis 3:24; Numbers 22:23; 1 Chronicles 21:16; )

      Delete
    2. True, but I don't remember them cutting a swath through crowds like Gladiators. :D

      Delete
    3. Please read Ezekiel 9, God commands his executioners to slay the people who have been disobedient with "destroying weapons in their hands". God says, " go through the city after him and strike; do not let your eye have pity and do not spare."

      Sword, famine and plaques were used over and over again in Ezekiel to destroy rebellious people and enemy nations. It is not pretty but it is God's wrath.
      I agree the ninja look was too dramatic and fantastical, but the wrath is seen. Now, if one does not know The Bible, that would look rather severe. But, maybe it was just the image that might draw attention from our uneducated and biblical illiterate people who crave violence to hold their attention very long.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous, Your comment is well thought out and I appreciate it. I agree from what I have heard, God's wrath was seen. However, the problem is, God's wrath for WHAT? not for what Sodom was destroyed for: homosexuality. What will stick in people's minds is what they suspected in their carnal mind all along: the destruction of the city was not for homosexuality, and adding to that the overblown ninja scenes, they will more easily dismiss the story as farce.

      Delete
    5. Elizabeth, I totally agree that the people watching do not know the reasons behind God's Wrath.
      I fortunately am Studying Ezekiel right now and also know the prophesies from the other major prophets but how many Christian actually study the Bible or read it. And there are so many who only know the NT. Without the understanding of the OT, most of the Bible show is not understandable. I fear that most will see God as cruel and very harsh, but my hope is that some will want to know more. We must pray for this.
      The scene of Abraham and Isaac was not explained well at all. How will they understand that?
      I do not want to criticise the producers choice of Biblical advisors, but ??? Where were the trustworthy scholars.
      So many are searching for an anchor in this strange world, and they will not find it in vampires and werewolves, so my desire is that someone through all this will be drawn to God.

      Delete
  9. "I am not going to watch it."

    After learning everything I know about it by not watching I am going to criticize it.

    Huh?

    I don't expect perfect doctrine, and artistic liberties are perfect fine. You really thing that all these conversations in the bible were less then two lines each? You think Paul would arrive in a city and speak on one paragraph? The rest is not there for time reasons. We get the meat of it. To add some drama of COURSE there will be extra dialog. Honestly, this article is NOT helpful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you don't mimd watching a production created by people who don't know the Lord, who consulted with people who don't know the Lord, and in the very first installment, have added something to Genesis 22? Hm. Okey dokey then.

      Delete
    2. In these days of the Internet, one doesn't need to watch something to know all about it (thankfully).

      Delete
  10. A Christian friend of mine for about a week before it aired tonight, was promoting watching the movie and using it like a door opener with non Christians. I, curious by nature, and not one to just accept what someone else says, because by doing so, that leaves me open to being deceived.

    So, I decided to check it out. I can honestly say, without any bias, that it is so not what it was hyped out to be. It truly lacks substance.

    This comment truly sums it up perfectly:

    ""This doesn’t serve the source material — so rich in interconnections across time — very well, and it doesn’t make for very involving television. Abraham, Moses, David, Daniel and the other great biblical figures aren’t really developed in a way that illuminates them or makes them linger in our minds; they are simply called forth to perform a set piece or two. It’s like a trip through a Christian theme park. “Next stop on the tour, ladies and gentlemen: the Noah’s ark tableau, followed by the Daniel in the lion’s den diorama.”

    It was very disappointing. I think they failed. I don't understand why either, they felt the need to try to pack so many important events into one movie. That just doesn't do it justice. How do you end up relating to characters that you barely see. No actor is that good.

    There is a huge difference in the drama they added to this, compared to the drama in say The Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston. Though I have since realize that movie too left parts out, I believe that was more due for length, rather than to keep people from knowing the truth. The truth of the store of Moses, has huge impact of it's own, just as the other events as related to us in the bible, that exaggerating truly isn't necessary. At least not from the perspective of us sincere, true, Christians. They think by amping up biblical events, it somehow makes it more appealing to the unsaved. They don't realize that it really actually doesn't. If The Word of God straight from the bible, in it's simple truth, doesn't grab them, and bring them into belief, it's foolish to assume that if you put it into a movie and blow it up, that it will somehow work like magic. Non saved people have seen The Ten Commandments, they've seen the Jesus movies, they've seen other religious movies, and t.v. shows, and even when there is accuracy, if the person still doesn't want to believe, they wont, and thus they haven't.

    I heard Mark Burnett boasting on t.v. about this. Saying how he gurantees so many people will see this not just now, but for many generations to come. How offensive that pride was to me. And how erroneous it is I now know from what I saw. If he picked just one account of the bible, one that hasn't been done yet, like say Pauls conversion, and ministry, and done it completely accurate, it would have been better money and time spent, and could have possible had a great impact with a higher out come of true conversions. People who aren't saved need to see that side of the bible. Bad people that God still loves, and gives redemption to, and how those people can turn around and go from doing so much wrong, so much evil, and end up doing so much right, so much good.

    People are better off sticking with the bible. Even as someone saved about 18 years now, reading accounts of events I've read before, still have great impact. It is still amazing truth!

    God bless!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks J.L.

      You might enjoy "Damascus Speaks", a movie on the account of Paul. This docudrama, a Syrian Life Agape production, portrays the life of the Apostle Paul and was filmed on location in Syria where Paul encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus. All actors were local Arabs. It was made for Arabic speakers but there are English subtitles. Joel C. Rosenberg wrote about it here
      http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/inside-the-revolution-more-than-1000-syrian-leaders-attend-premiere-of-damascus-film/

      http://www.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9K6hz492cw.com/watch?v=iQ2tzEaDUi8

      People ARE better off sticking with the bible! I agree completely and that is an excellent point

      Delete
    2. J.L. one other thing- were there television commercials in between segments?

      Delete
    3. Were/are there commercials in History Channel's airing of the 'The Bible' miniseries? You betcha. The main sponsors (= lots of repetitive ads) are Walmart, ChristianMingle, and CatholicsComeHome.

      Delete
    4. CatholicsComeHome . . . interesting.

      Mystery Babylon Sponsorship.

      Delete
    5. I wasn't aware there has been a movie done about Paul, glad to know there has been, thank you, I hope to be able to check it out! :)

      And the other question about commercials was already answered. And to be honest, I didn't watch much of it, because of how poorly it was done.

      My Christian friend however, wrote me today and told me he loved it, how it really blessed him. He's a babe in Christ though, there's much he has yet to learn.

      Delete
    6. Hi J.L.,

      The 'Damascus Speaks' movie was done for Arabs because Paul is so well-known in their world. It is an evangelistic vehicle for them, that is why they used local Arab actors and made the movie in Arabic.

      Interesting about your friend. I'm glad he has a friend like you to discuss these things with

      Delete
    7. We were shocked that Sampson was black, where in the bible does it say that???

      Delete
  11. These days, if anyone puts a Christian label on something, then it must be Christian, right?? How can anyone expect unbelievers, void of the Spirit of God, to produce something that contains the Truth? THE Bible says that the natural mind (the unbeliever)cannot understand the things of the Spirit. Why anyone would think that they could use this tool of the devil to bring anyone to salvation is beyond me. Please people, if you know the Lord, get out there and tell people why this is so wrong on all levels(unless you can't see that it is)!!
    Just like the masses that have followed Rick Warren into the false PDL church, and can't see the error there.
    These things can't even be called deception because anyone who knows the TRUTH should know it is of the LIE. I would start to question that Christian label that I have put on myself. As THE Bible says, Examine yourself to see if you are in the faith...
    Arguing with Elizabeth only shows your lack of understanding. I wouldn't get my theology from a couple of New Age gurus.
    Sorry.

    Pam

    ReplyDelete
  12. As a Bible believing Christian who has read completely through the Scriptures more than 35 times, I saw maybe 1/2 hour's worth of the program on the History channel. It is understandable that when the Bible does not supply the details of a story, the writers would use their imagination to 'fill in the blanks'. But what is happening with this mini-series is that known truth in the details of Scripture is being contradicted by the writers. And this is what is presented as what the Bible says. It is a series of small details, but the story on the History channel is not the story found in the Bible. It's different. Moses had a conversation with Pharoah before turning the water to blood, he didn't hid out on the other side of the river. Pharoah did not just tell Moses 'NO' every time, he offered a set of three compromises (don't go far, leave your families behind, leave your cattle behind), there was a separation between the Jews and Egyptians for many of the later plagues, so that when there was darkness in the whole land, the Jews had light in their dwellings. Ex. 10:23 The 600,000 men plus women and children (a group that numbered close to 2 million) left the land of Egypt and were led by a pillar of cloud in the day and a pillar of fire at night. When the Egyptians initially saw the Israelites, they did not immediately give chase, because God moved the pillar between the two groups to give time and protection for His people Ex.14:19-20. Moses stretched forth his rod over the sea to open and close it, but not in the movie. The 600 chariots would have included Pharoah as Ex. 14:28 states that not one of them escaped.
    Seriously, folks, I'm not trying to nit-pic, but here are eight Bible facts that were not just omitted by the movie but were CHANGED by the movie. There are a lot of people who are just glad the the Bible is being presented to the public. My contention is that a different Bible is being presented.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, the advertisements were very secular....they advertised for the Catholic church also...NOT a good thing!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Related in spirit, but a different medium: There is an "experience" called "The Story" written by pastors Randy Frazee and Max Lucado that is being marketed to churches. It is a chronological retelling of the bible designed for small group discussion. A friend of mine goes to a church who is promoting the book (and all its related materials) by encouraging the congregation to go through The Story. My friend invited me to be part of her study group. My response was: why not simply use the bible? Without reading "The Story," I cannot make an accurate assessment, but I strongly suspect it takes some liberties with the truth and substance of scripture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't speak to that particular book myself, but you made me remember a "Bible for Dummies" book I read a while back. It was very shortly after I began learning the heavy theology and so if there were errors, I don't recall them, but to my knowledge, I remember it being very well done -- they actually gave helpful interpretation of what occurred. I was impressed that a presumably secular book (though written by two Christian scholars whose names I haven't found associated with any questionable movements, since) was so informative despite it being written in summary style and not presented as an overtly theological text.

      Given the choice between "Every Day a Friday" and "The Bible for Dummies," I'd recommend the latter to a nonbeliever in a heartbeat.

      But knowing what I know now about discernment, I'm compelled to look back over it again when I have the opportunity.

      Delete
    2. Well said, Hakam. Loved your wit about the Every Day a Friday vs. Bible for Dummies :)

      Delete
  15. I agree with the post on doing a full complete and accurate account of Paul's conversion. He is the Apostle for us today during this Dispensation of Grace. Most people do not even know who he is

    ReplyDelete
  16. Im with you on this Elizabeth the history channel is a vile tv station to has time and again tried to disprove the word of God and plant seeds of doubt about the truth. Its a secular station controlled by the elites of this world do you really think they want to inspire people to come to Christ through their mini series. They are wolves in sheep's clothing! Try to stay away from anything like that on a national network BC they will surely try to mix myth with facts.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Elizabeth, are you EVER wrong? I think you're wrong in being so judgmental in a negative way about this series. Are you saying that the Holy Spirit is unable to use this kind of work to bring people in to explore Gods word for themselves? I can assure you I was brought back to become a Christ follower through a church I wouldn't consider going to today.
    I give God ALL the glory for everything and I KNOW He can do anything, use anyone and any circumstance for His glory. I'm disappointed that you are discouraging people to watch this because it may be keeping someone that needs to be brought back full circle to get right with the Lord.
    I know that this production is not exact in how the Bible was written however I also know the Bible is infallible and I know it's 100% inspired by God.
    To God be the Glory!!

    ReplyDelete
  18. 40YearWanderer said

    You say that they are "not Christians" as if you know (in a comment above). We can not know the hearts of man as God does - it says so in His Word. I do have to take note in the LA Times article (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-the-bible-history-survivor-20130303,0,2686684.story
    ) that Burnett and Downey say they are Christians and that they prayed about this. We all have to take them at their word as we can not possibly see into their hearts. I am getting an amazing response after writing about this on my blog and on FB. All anyone can know for sure is that we all take liberties in our interpretations even if we don't realize it. I have seen terrible comments on many sites. The infighting of Believers is perpetrated under the heading "search the fruit". I agree that lies are to be examined. The truth is however that God uses all to His purpose and that if more Believers sought the Truth in the Word then there would be very little if any division. That does not mean that God won't work since we get things wrong. It means He will all the more. It breaks my heart to see the divisiveness.

    Yes, check the facts from the Truth but pray for those who are getting the Word out there because another fact is that many who see this would never set foot in a church much less pick up a Bible. So maybe if they see it ... they will. That is what we should be praying for.

    (By the way Patheos is a Spiritual website, not a Christian only one and has many words of divisiveness. I just read an article where a Christian was cutting Christian radio/artists/songs to the bone because of this, that, and the other. That is certainly not what Jesus told us to do - cut other Believers who are going after God.)

    Thankfully He has been gracious enough to me to teach me when I have misinterpreted, gotten things wrong, and the like. He forgave me because He knows my heart. No one else can know those depths.

    Some Bible versions are inaccurate and some take creative license in expounding on the wordage used and some are literal translations, but all are only interpretations of the original Hebrew and Greek which most Believers never dive into. If we all read the original within context of the surrounding culture, we’d either ‘get it’ better or we’d think it was ‘inaccurate’.

    The point is we must go searching for the Truth ourselves. And we must accept that humans teaching humans the Bible is not an easy thing to do without the Spirit leading.

    But God certainly says, “Commit your way to the LORD; trust in him, and he will act.” Psalm 37:5

    ReplyDelete
  19. "You say that they are "not Christians" as if you know (in a comment above). We can not know the hearts of man as God does - it says so in His Word. I do have to take note in the LA Times article (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-the-bible-history-survivor-20130303,0,2686684.story
    ) that Burnett and Downey say they are Christians and that they prayed about this. We all have to take them at their word as we can not possibly see into their hearts."

    We can and do know that these people are not Christians. Not because we can see their hearts but because the word of God clearly states that we are to "Test the spirits to see if they are from God"-1 John 4:1. We are not to go along with everyone who professes to be a "Christian" and automatically believe they are simply because they "say" they are-that's to be gullible. No we have to go by testing the (spirits) behind what they profess.

    1John 4:2, 3 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

    The spirit of antichrist is to put a different "Jesus" in the place of the Biblical Jesus. So when people say they believe in or preach "Jesus", make sure they're referring to the Biblical Jesus and not some alternate "Jesus".

    Roma Downy is a New Ager and a Mystic and Roman Catholic. New Agers and Mystics do NOT have the Jesus of the Bible. RCC's system is not Christian neither. They are false and are lost. They are NOT Christians. Thus we can KNOW because of what they espouse. We can know by comparing to what they believe with the Word of God. They have another gospel and another jesus and are LOST

    ReplyDelete
  20. http://throughaglassonion.com/2012/02/11/roma-downey-catholic/comment-page-1/#comment-371

    ReplyDelete
  21. THe things that stand out in my mind is the Word of God stating not to add or subtract from His Word and how this type of production may be doing that. As well as the fact that, even though we should not judge, as some are saying, scripture does tell us to judge the fruit of those that call themselves Christian. And as Elizabeth pointed out, Ms. Roma Downey is very much into the new age, therefore, her world views will be skewed by those type of teachings she is entangled with, even if she is also trying to hang on to the bible and call herself Christian. My last point is also that since it is obvious that we are very much in the end times and since there definately will be a one world government ruled by the antichrist and a one world currency, which is surley on the horizon, let us not forget as believers that there will also be a one world religion at that time too. We who are believers will be raptured with the Lord in the air but during that tribulation time period this one world religion will dominate everything and it will be done so by the false prophet and antichrist, who is in place of Christ, not just against. Therefore, it is not unusual to see at this time the forming of so-called christians mixing their false beliefs and ideas with other religions to make one form of worship and they will use "Christianity" not doubt. I believe these type of shows and all the books and conferences and such are an attempt to bring this all together soon, as we are on the cusp of the Lord's call to us to come home and these very things will take place so soon. THat is why Elizabeth constantly brings up her concerns about these type of issues as it deals with correctly dividing the word of truth. Many so-called believers are not truly believers and many that are, are sorrowfully asleep and don't see or understand what is happening and that is because they truly don't know their bible, The Word of God. It is happening more and more and faster and faster and that is why Elizabeth continues to call out what she sees as false as it compares to scripture, to warn all, believers and nonbelievers so they won't be caught up off guard or in deception when that day arrives and it is fast approaching. She is saying what she does out of Love, not judgementalism. Not caring what people think as to correct doctrine via the Holy Spirit and just letting people blindly walk off a cliff for the sake of not sounding judgmental, would be totally selfish. It is her concern for mankind and their deep need of true salvation that she does all that she does on this blog. And that is how I see it. I don't agree with everything single conviction that Elizabeth shares, but I can honestly see that she is motivated and prompted by the spirit to speak the truth in and out of season. Thank you Elizabeth for being what the Lord called you to be a watchman. Bless you and realize that many that come here will be lead away from error and into truth because of your correction. Don't ever doubt that. The Lord uses you mightly and your reward is great in heaven. I appreciate your ministry here on this blog and thank you. See you on the other side sister. Amen.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Why the producers of The Bible Series should have gone to Sunday School

    http://christiantheology.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/why-the-producers-of-the-bible-series-should-have-gone-to-sunday-school/

    "It’s not the selectivity of events that is the problem, it’s not the special effects, it’s not the limitations of the medium, it is the lying."

    ReplyDelete
  23. After watching this 'show' for about 20 minutes, we turned it off in disgust. They have strayed so far from what the scriptures say it should be rated as mostly fiction. The Ark leaking? They have to be kidding? Abraham's wife Sarah as a dirty unkempt vagabond look alike?? Why could they not have followed the scriptures & had her played by a beautiful actress??? Give me a break! It is horrible!!! An insult to any Christian who knows the Bible. Too afraid to upset the gay & lesbian crowd to show Sodom & Gomorrah for what they were??? Ms. Downey & her husband should be ashamed of themselves for passing this tripe off as bible fact.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi Elizabeth. Thank you for standing boldly on the truth of God's word. What congregation of the church of Christ do you attend?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're welcome, Anonymous. I attend the local church. Where do you go?

      Delete
  25. I attend the church of Christ. Just trying to determine if you are a member of a denomination or the church established on the day of Pentecost. You sound like you are a member of the church Jesus died for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, I am a believer in Christ and a member of the Kingdom. There are believers in many denominations. The United Church of Christ is a denomination like any other, and if you're in the International Church of Christ it is listed as an aberrant cult. (see below)

      The United Church of God also teaches unbiblical things such as the fact that all other people in other denominations are not going to heaven, and claims it is the "Church where God is still speaking.". I am sorry you tried to "detect" whether I was a believer or not based on my affiliation with a denomination instead of reading the scriptures I list and whether I divided them rightly and leaving my salvation up to Jesus to detect.

      More here on ICC:
      http://carm.org/international-church-christ

      UCOG: http://carm.org/ucog

      Delete
  26. Your response is very interesting to me for several reason but I do want to clarify. First, I am not a member of the United Church of Christ or the ICC. I had the unfortunate opportunity of studying with members of the ICC while in college and quickly understood they were not operating in the manner God calls them as outlined in the scripture. I am a member of the church of Christ. That is a designation not a name because the church is Christ's he died for it and purchased it with his blood and he is the head of it. So again, it's a scriptural designation as is the church being called the pillar in the ground of truth...asking about what church you attend shouldn't be offensive or a problem at all because the congregation you attend (denominational or not) is one indication as to the practices in which one subscribes. So if I told you, I am a member of the sacred heart Catholic church, you would have some indication as to what I believe and whether or not the congregation I attend is operating in line with the scriptures. I do not believe that someone can attend a congregation that is operating in error, worship there, submit to leadership there and be right with God. So where someone attends is important. Rightly dividing the word is critical and the results of rightly dividing the word would lead a person to attend, be active in and submit to the scriptural leadership of a congregation operating in the truth of God's word. Finally, I want to be clear that just because a church has a scriptural designation does not mean it is operating in truth--one must look at the practices...this is critical and I want you to understand that I know that.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think the series is well done and i enjoyed watching it.

    ReplyDelete

4000 posts!

Dear Reader, As of yesterday I have published 4000 essays at the End Time. My goal has been to share thoughts on the three general topics ...