Customer Reviews

Ancient Evidence - Mysteries of Jesus

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

The first part of this collection is about King Herod, and his infamous 'slaughter of the innocents' at Bethlehem. It's very well done, and Herod is accurately portrayed as a brutal despot. The only evidence against the 'slaughter' ever happening is that it's only mentioned in St. Matthew's Gospel, and no other ancient source, Biblical or otherwise. But then it's at last revealed that the actual number of children involved was at most 20, which would have been insignificant for a savage king like Herod, so that all the modern analysis comes together as being fully consistent with the Gospel account.

The 2'nd part. the 'Real Disciples of Jesus', is not so great, being much better done in Melvyn Bragg's earlier TV mini-series "The Apostles"; it tries to use modern forensic science where it can't really fit. Also, it assumes Jesus' miracles to be 'faith-healing', which doesn't really explain his feeding the multitude with a few loaves and fishes, or turning water into wine, or calming the storm, etc.

The 3'rd part, 'Who killed Jesus?' seems incongruous at first, but actually manages to blend the ancient accounts with modern forensics in a way that makes for good viewing.

The final part, about Mary Magdalene, is not bad, but again it was better done in Melvyn Bragg's series. It's good to see Mary's name cleared from the medieval notion that she was a woman of ill repute, but this probably goes too far the other way, giving undue emphasis to the so-called 'Gospel of Mary Magdalene'. That 'gospel' was probably written a century after Mary, by a woman trying to further her own career, not Jesus' message.

I recently purchased this series and was I ever surprised when I watched it at home. Not pleasantly!!! They try to explain everything in a scientific way. It's very clear that Bible believing Christians did not have a hand in creating these programs. For instance, they want you to think that Paul who was one of the New Testament's greatest apostles (The Apostle to the Gentiles) was mentally ill. They compare him to an epileptic who he sees things and NEVER actually speaks to GOD. For instance Paul never actually saw the resurrected Christ when he was on the way to Damascus. He just thought he saw him. He was struck by lightning. That's why he was blind for 3 days. If you believe in God please save your money and don't buy this series. All of my friends are Christians. I can't even give it away if I want to.

I was so shocked at the poor quality and irreverent nature of this item, it is garbage for your brain. I have purchased documentaries from BBC before and was equally disapointed. From now on I will stay away.

This program is total trash. The BBC has made a side business of attacking historic Christian faith. I dare them to cast their postmodern polemics against Islam, but they won't do it because they are intellectually dishonest and cowards.

So I watched a few episodes of this series a long time ago on tv and was delighted to see there were more.
There are 2 things you need to think about before purchasing this.
First, are you open minded?
If you are interested in history, and archeology and truth, this is a great series. It actually lends credence To many stories of the bible. But it is honest, we know much of history is exaggerated or inaccurate and this series tears down and corrects many stories of the bible. Others, it restates and says, rather bluntly, "yeah, sorry, we just couldn't find anything to support that outside of what is written in the bible." It uses science and hundreds of years of study and understanding by dozens of scholars (not biblical scholars mind you, real, evidence finding researching scholars, not people who have never been within 4000 miles of the place but claim they have prayed on it for hours) to reframe other passages. It really is fascinating and some of the conclusions might surprise you, while others remain far fetched. The series is very polite and allows the audience to make their own judgements.

Second, are you a bible thumping fool?
Why did you read this far into the review? As soon as you saw the word science, you should have yelled that I am a witch and run for cover.

The fisrt part, on St. Peter, is a very successful blend of archaeology and Biblical tradition. It's excellent, and it makes heavy use of the Apocryphal New Testament from Nag Hammadi in Egypt, but, for the first time I've ever seen, in a positive way.

The second, on St. Paul, is good, but probably tries too hard with science and archaeology where it doesn't really fit in with the Biblical traditions.

The final part, on the "Revelations" / Apocalypse is great, and long overdue. It shows that this last book of the NT was NOT a prediction of the future (an idea that's misled countless people over the centuries) but a message only relevant in the ancient author's own time. And it seems that the nasty number is NOT 666 after all !