Other Voices on "The Bible"

Tuesday I shared my thoughts on the History Channel' "The Bible." Here are some other interesting reviews, comments and analyses on the content of the presentation and its effect on our culture and society:

Stand to Reason

CT Gleanings

Breakpoint

Get Religion

Joe Carter

The Examiner

American Thinker - Robert Wilcox

I am certain that there will be many more interesting reviews as the series continues.

First Thoughts on The History Channel Series "The Bible"

The first episode of the History Channel's mini-series "The Bible" aired last Sunday night. There was a lot of anticipation for  this event in the blog-a-sphere, on Twitter, and on Facebook. Since the producer, Mark Burnett, was involved with Survivor, some joked that Eve would get voted off the island in the first episode. Since it was on the History Channel, some wondered if Moses would be hawking the stone tablets to the guys on Pawn Stars!

Here's my first impressions and thoughts.

1. They sure skipped a lot. The first episode covered the entire Pentateuch  all the way up to the early chapters of Joshua.  Lots of time for Abraham and Moses, but totally skipped the story of Joseph, one of my favorite sagas in the whole Bible. And how do you skip Moses' marriage  the golden calf, the twelve spies, etc. If they are going to cover the whole Bible, I guess a lot is going to be left out.
2. There are some inaccuracies. I mean, hey, they didn't carry the Ark of the Covenant around uncovered, and Joshua did not kneel in front of the Ark open to the view of others. He wasn't a high priest, and would have been struck dead for doing so. And we won't even go into the whole ninja, samurai angels in Sodom stuff. As I expected, they were far too politically correct to even touch on the homosexual aspects of the Sodom story.
3. Don't expect any deep theology from the series. As Ben Witherington described it, this is the "Less Filing, Tastes Great" version of the Bible. This is going to be a dip in the shallow end of the spiritual pool, no a deep ocean journey.Some commentators have been concerned about lack of theological sophistication among the advisers to the series, and even some potential heresy. So far, however, I did not notice any heresy, but only shallowness and a surface level presentation.
4. As the old cliche goes, the book is always better than the movie. If this series gets some people to actually pull their dusty Bibles off the shelf and try reading them, more power to it. That will be a great service. The Book is truly better than the movie!

"The Bible" was followed by the premiere of another interesting and much anticipated historical saga, "The Vikings." Who knows - maybe the ratings for these two series will be so big that the History Channel will now realize that airing, uh, you know, actual "history," might get better ratings than "Ice Road Truckers."

Only Two Men

The TV sit-com "Two and a Half Men" may soon be down to only two. From CT Gleanings:

The youngest member of CBS's "Two and a Half Men" soon could be walking away from the raunchy show after 10 years—and he's urging other viewers to do the same.

In a YouTube video posted by Forerunner Christian Church, 19-year-old Angus T. Jones calls the show "filth" and encourages viewers to stop watching. Jones says he began to doubt his role on the show—where he earns an estimated $350,000 per episode—after converting to Christianity.

"I'm not okay with what I'm learning, what the Bible says and being on that television show," Jones stated.

He also urged viewers, "If you watch 'Two and a Half Men,' please stop watching ... Please stop filling your head with filth."

According to the Chicago Tribune, "The CBS network and Warner Bros Television, which makes the comedy, both declined to comment on Monday on Jones's remarks."

Tebow Ad Exposed the Left For Who They Really Are

Well, the Tim Tebow commercial during the Super Bowl seemed rather understated, didn't it?

When I saw it, my first thought was that Focus on the Family and the Tebows had done a real number on the gang from NARAL and NOW. I wonder if it was deliberate?

Think about it. They announce in advance that there will be a pro-life commercial during the game, without much detail on the content. The usual suspects on the left go ballistic, calling the commercial "divisive" without even seeing it. Pam Tebow gets personal attacks and is called a liar. Numerous liberal organizations demand that CBS not air the ad.

Result, the ad ends up being such that no one could be offended. NARAL and NOW look like fools, and are revealed to be, not pro-woman or pro-choice, but pro-abortion (and anti-free speech). Of course, pro-life activists already knew that, but now it is totally obvious to everyone. Even after the ad airs, they are complaining that the play tackle in the spot promotes violence against women! Oh, come on! Score a big one for our side.

Jeff Emanuel at Red State Blog agreed with me that Focus on the Family and Pam Tebow Play the Pro-Abortion Left like a Stradivarius

Our side is winning, and the left knows it (and are very afraid).

One Feminist Sees the Light

As many of you may know, a pro-life advertisement will be broadcast during the Super Bowl next Sunday, featuring University of Florida football star Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam. He's the Heisman Trophy winner who is famous for showing Scripture references in his under-eye face paint during nationally televised football games.

When Pam Tebow was pregnant with Tim, she was advised by her doctor to abort. She chose not to, and look what that then unborn child has become.

Much attention has been brought to the ad in advance of its airing due to the reaction of the gang from the National Organization for Women (NOW), who apparently think pro-life views should never be heard in America. They are demanding that CBS not show the ad during the game because it is too divisive!

Those kind of responses from the left have become routinely expected, unfortunately. Apparently the "ladies" at NOW just cannot see how silly and bigoted their actions look to normal people, even those who are not convinced pro-lifers. However, one pro-choice feminist, Sally Jenkins at the Washington Post (of all places), can see it. Here is what she said.

"I'll spit this out quick, before the armies of feminism try to gag me and strap electrodes to my forehead: Tim Tebow is one of the better things to happen to young women in some time. I realize this stance won't endear me to the "Dwindling Organizations of Ladies in Lockstep," otherwise known as DOLL, but I'll try to pick up the shards of my shattered feminist credentials and go on.

I'm pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I've heard in the past week, I'll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time." For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn't."

I tell you, folks, we are winning! More and more Americans are seeing the light.