Review: The Bible Episodes 2&3 - lies from the pit of hell

I know the title of this review sounds harsh and shocking, but I believe it to be entirely accurate.  Rather than dealing with the individual errors in episodes 2 & 3 of The Bible (a task better left to those who have two hour daily broadcasts since there was not a single scene in the The Bible that accurately reflects the text of the Bible and the errors are simply too numerous for anyone who shepherds a flock and preaches every week to deal with in detail) I want to address two profoundly dangerous intentional theological errors that permeate these episodes.

The first thematic heresy is the elimination of sin and repentance from The Bible.  If a person who isn’t familiar the Bible were to take their understanding of God from the The Bible they would be entirely unaware of sin and God’s righteous wrath and judgment against sin and what a godly response to an awareness of sin in the life of a believer is.

This denial of sin and the need for repentance first comes to the fore in The Bible’s treatment of the book of Judges.  Through the voice of the narrator The Bible identifies the root of the chaos in Israel in the period of the judges is a “lack of strong leaders like Moses and Joshua.”  But Scripture clearly identifies the source of the problems in Israel as God’s judgment against Israel for doing what was evil in the sight of the LORD and worshiping idols.

It is not just sin that was ignored it was also repentance and it was ignored in a spectacular manner.  The treatment of two of the greatest chapters on repentance in the Old Testament, 2 Samuel 12 and Daniel 4 are illustrative of The Bible’s view of repentance.  It blasphemously mangles one and completely ignores the other. 

Second Samuel 12, Nathan’s confrontation with David over his sin with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah the Hittite,  records no immediate response from David, although when his son is afflicted (as Nathan foretold) he fasts and spends days prostrating himself before God.  David’s heart response to the exposure of his sin is recorded in Psalm 51 and it expresses profound brokenness, admissions of guilt before a holy God, pleas for mercy, and promises to bear witness to the word of God to others (The Bible puts the words of Psalm 51 in the mouth of Daniel in a manner that teaches that obedience in difficult circumstance robs the believer of the joy of their salvation).  Taken together Psalm 51 and 2 Samuel 12 paint a picture of David as a man broken over his sin and his standing before a holy God.

But how does The Bible claim that David reacted?  After being confronted by Nathan and hearing that God declared that his son will die as a judgment on the sin of David and Bathsheba the David of The Bible (not the Bible) defiantly says “We’ll see.”  That is not artistic license, that is showing David displaying the exact opposite behavior and attitude that is recorded in Scripture.  The Bible’s teaching on David is the exact opposite of the Bible’s teaching about David.  This is a lie straight from the pit of hell, and exactly how the serpent twisted the Word of God in the garden.

And just as bad is The Bible’s ignoring of Daniel 4.  Nebuchadnezzar is a major character in The Bible episode 3.  And according to the The Bible he goes insane in response to Shadrack, Meshack and Abedndigo being delivered from being burned at the stake (not a fiery furnace) and seemingly dies bound in chains in a dungeon (that’s how he is last seen in the episode).  However the Bible records that Nebuchadnezzar is struck with madness as judgment for the sin of pride years later.  This is a serious enough error, but it is the omission of Nebuchadnezzar’s repentance that is truly stomach turning.  Daniel 4:34-37 (a passage I quoted in my baptismal testimony because my pre-salvation life was characterized by the sin of pride) records Nebuchadnezzar’s confession of repentance.  Nebuchadnezzar didn’t die in a dungeon as an insane unrepentant sinner, he died as a redeemed believer who became one of the authors of inspired scripture (Daniel 4:34-37 records in its entirety a letter written by the repentant king).  But since in The Bible there is no sin there is certainly no need for repentance.  Again The Bible teaches the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches!

As sickening as its message on repentance and sin is, The Bible’s view of Jesus is out and out undisguised blasphemy.  They functionally deny His role as savior and His deity. 

There are no more important passages in all of Scripture for understanding who Jesus is than the accounts of his baptism.  When John (the baptist) sees him approaching he exclaims “behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” and when Jesus comes up out of the water the Spirit descends on Him like a dove, and the Father speaks from heaven “this is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased.”  But guess what is missing from The Bible’s account.  John’s confession, the Spirit descending, and the Father Speaking.  No trinity, no sacrificial lamb, and no deity, just blasphemy.  The Jesus of The Bible is no more the Jesus of the Bible than the Jesus of the Book of Mormon, the Koran or the Oprah Winfrey Network.   And incidentally (and it is incidental at this point) in a profound twisting of Luke 5 the Jesus of The Bible came not to save sinners from the wrath of God but to “change the world.”

The Bible presents lies as truth by twisting scripture until it teaches the exact opposite message than the living and active Word of God.  This has been the devil’s favorite tool to drag people into hell since the beginning.  It is what he did in the Garden, it’s what he did when he tempted Jesus, and it is what he is doing now on the History Channel.

[And if your interested check out my new blog of Marriage, Love, Multiple Sclerosis and Suffering here]

Review: The Bible Episode 1

            I will readily admit that having heard that The History Channel was going to air a miniseries entitled The Bible (italics throughout refer to the TV show, not the Scripture) produced by Mark Burnett (of Survivor fame) my expectations were very low.  But I was wrong, the first episode was far worse than I could have possibly imagined.  It wasn’t just low quality television and inaccurate, it has laid the foundation for a denial of the Gospel and impugned the character of God. 

            The episode began with a montage that covered the first eleven chapters of Genesis.  And that alone is a huge problem.  While I understand that any film adaptation of the entire Bible (and whether that is a good idea to even attempt is highly debatable and an entirely different subject) is going to have to pick and choose what  to include and what to omit, the decision to ignore the fall is catastrophic.

            Genesis 3 is one of the key chapters in all of scripture, and it is foundational for the rest of God’s revelation.  If there is no fall the rest of Scripture just seems pointless.  Although there was of course a brief clip of a very sultry Eve biting into a juicy plum, the narrator simply said that man now knew both good and evil, with no reference to disobedience to God.  In fact there was (to my recollection) no mention at all that the fruit was forbidden, or that eating it was an act of disobedience.  And thus the foundation was laid for a denial of the Gospel.  If there is no sin, then there is no need for a savior and certainly no need for repentance. 

            And the denial of sin continues and worsens in the opening montage when in a leaky ark Noah (presumably) explains to his family (presumably) that the “this (the flood) has happened because of mistakes and wrong decisions.”  Not only is this ignoring sin, it is an outright denial of scripture.  The flood did not come because people made mistakes, it came because man was sinful and had become so evil, that God saw that “every intention of the thoughts of his (man’s) heart was only evil continually.”Judgment comes as a result of sin, not as result of mistakes and poor decisions.  

And that is a central theme in the Bible, a holy and just God cannot overlook sin but must punish it.  If that is missing, there is no basis for a Holy and just God who is rich in mercy and love, sending his Son to die as an atoning sacrifice so that whoever would repent and believe in Christ, and trust solely in His sacrifice for salvation would not perish but have eternal life.  If the concept of God’s just wrath against sin is scrubbed from The Bible then I truly fear that it will serve to inoculate sinners in desperate need of a savior against the actual Gospel.  

If it is possible to get worse after the opening montage it does.  The retelling of the story of Abram/Abraham in addition to being shot through with errors, seems to be a protracted assault on the character of both God and Abraham.  The relationship between them is portrayed essentially in terms of a capricious God who repeatedly puts a begrudgingly obedient and joyless Abraham to the test.  In the scene of Abraham’s sacrifice of Issac Abraham looks up to the sky and angrily shouts “have I not done enough to prove my faith?”  That is awfully far afield from Abraham believed and it was counted to him as righteousness.  

[And I can’t resist mentioning that Sodom was judged kung fu style by a Jet-Li             look-a-like angel. Of course judged for what is left vague.]

After this awful scene the series again goes into montage mode, and skips ahead to the story of the exodus, and Moses also gets a significant character makeover.  The Bible essentially portrays Moses as a Hebrew William Wallace (the Brave Heart version that is), and it starts with a ridiculous back story.  After the conclusion of a montage of the Egyptians killing the Israelite male children and the discovery of the baby Moses in the rushes by Pharaoh’s daughter, we are introduced to a teenage Moses fighting a palace duel with the son of Pharaoh.  He subsequently learns he is an Israelite, sees their condition and kills an Egyptian overseer.  But rather than following the biblical account The Bible has an Israelite slave offering to hide the body and telling Moses to flee, which he does. 

The story then skips ahead to the Burning Bush, and rather than following the biblical account (are you sensing a theme yet?) Moses militantly proclaims that he (not He) will free his (not His) people.  And he carries this prideful freedom fighter attitude into Egypt.  

He gives rousing speeches to convince the Israelites to follow him rather than relying on the authenticating signs that the Lord had given him to convince the people that he was sent by God. Moses sneak attacks Pharaoh by turning the Nile into blood while concealed in the reeds on the opposite bank while Pharaoh (sporting a facial scar from his duel with the teenage Moses) is floating on his back in the river, and the confrontation with the magicians of Egypt before Pharaoh is also completely missing and the subsequent plague montage bafflingly includes maggots. And all the while he is still giving rousing revolutionary speeches and recruiting Joshua, who is “the future” of Israel.  Eventually the final plague comes, in the form of a killing fog (I assume in a nod to the classic film The Ten Commandments).

To its credit The Bible does actually have the Israelites crossing a parted Red Sea, and the Egyptians being crushed under the waves, but to its shame it montages Israel at Sinai, and completely ignores the wilderness wanderings.  Again a key chapter of the Bible dealing with Sin and the need for a savior (Exodus 20) is completely ignored other than the tablets of the Law being shown emerging from a boulder during montage (again ignoring the biblical account, are you sensing the theme yet).  And of course there is no mention of what the tablets actually say.

And at the end of this montage we are given a few closing scenes: one of an armor clad Joshua praying, then of him staring menacingly at Jericho, and then one of Rahab being mistreated by the towns people of Jericho and of the spies getting into a sword fight inside of Jericho (that is the cliff hanger ending). 

My general impression of the first episode was one of a sustained attack on the character of God and on the “heroes” of the bible.  (To be clear the only hero of Scripture and the main actor in every story is God.)  God’s holiness is ignored, as is sin and His wrath against sin.  He is seen as occasionally wrathful, but the cause for his wrath is never discussed.  The flood is the result of mistakes and Sodom is dangerous, not wicked, so God’s wrath could be easily seen as being out of proportion or arbitrary.  The faith of Abraham is consistently portrayed as weak and grudgingly given, and Moses comes off as a prideful action hero rather the meekest man onthe face of the earth.

All of this gives a profound misunderstanding of who God is, and what kind of men he uses.  Faithful, trusting and broken men who realize they are not worthy of being used by God are the ones that He tends to use (as recorded in Scripture) and The Bible seems to be sending the message that He uses men of action who trust in themselves and who have faltering or reluctant faith.

My chief concern is this, if The Bible gets sin wrong, God’s character wrong, the narrative of Scripture wrong, the nature of man wrong and the fundamental character of key biblical figures wrong, what is there left for it to get right?  And it is getting this wrong before unbelievers and interspersed with commercials for the Roman Catholic Church (who claimed to have “compiled” the bible by the way) and Word of Faith churches (at least in the Metro DC market).  If an unbeliever, who was curious about the Bible sees this show, then goes to a church advertised during the show, they may never hear the Gospel, and they may actually be inoculated against it because they may believe they have actually learned what is in the Bible from The Bible.

The good news is this though; there may be increased opportunity to share the Gospel as unbelievers may have questions about the things they have seen on TV.  And you needn’t have seen the show to answer the questions because they need to hear the message of the Bible, not the message of The Bible.