Merry Xmas: British TV looks at the Bible

thebullet

Rebel without applause
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Posts
1,247
Bible Is 'Lies and Spin,' Says C4
By Jamie Doward
The Observer U.K.

Sunday 19 December 2004

'Sensationalist' film sparks anger among church
groups.
It's the season for Channel 4 to cause
controversy. Each year the channel strives to whip up
a furor surrounding its programming on Christmas Day.
If it is not trying to break the record for the most
f-words (2002), it's asking Ali G to present an
alternative Queen's speech (1999).

Now it has attracted anger from Christian groups
over its plans to screen a documentary which dismisses
some parts of the Bible as untrue and attacks others
as being a 'masterwork of spin'.

Evangelical groups are angry that Who Wrote the
Bible?, which will go out at 8.30pm, paints a negative
picture of Christian organizations and suggests links
between them and the troubles in the Middle East.

They have also expressed concerns about the
presenter, Dr Robert Beckford, a reader in theology at Birmingham University. Beckford's critically acclaimed documentary God is Black, which compared white and black people's interpretation of Christianity, angered some in the Anglican church who accused it of 'racialising' religious issues.

'Channel 4 has a record of going for the more
controversial take on religion,' said David Hilborn,
head of theology at the Evangelical Alliance. 'They
want to go down the more sensational route to grab
people's attention.'

Beckford defended the provocative timing of the documentary. 'To have faith in the world is to ask dangerous questions. Why not make the question at Christmas when we hear about this son of God who was born in dubious circumstances in a place which was the armpit of the world?'

In the new documentary, Beckford, a committed
Pentecostal Christian, describes a journey he made to
some of Christianity's holiest places to help him
uncover the provenance of the Bible. He calls his
conclusion an 'earth-shattering experience' and one
that made him doubt some of his most basic Christian
beliefs.

Of the Old Testament, Beckford declares: 'The
so-called law of Moses turns out to be the work of
many human hands. What I once thought was the word of
God was now beginning to sound like something out of
Stalin's Russia.'

He produces archaeological evidence to suggest the
Bible's claims that the kingdoms of David and Solomon
dominated the 10th century BC were wrong, an error
that raises profound claims about the genesis of
Christianity.

He declares the New Testament a 'masterwork of
spin written by people who were nowhere near the
events they describe, all gathered by powerful editors
who kept out ideas they did not like'.

The story of the nativity is also doubted.
Beckford argues that Matthew added the story to
fulfill a prophecy made in the Old Testament.

One of the most revealing moments comes when
Beckford visits the U.S. state of Georgia to talk to
President Bush's spiritual adviser, Baptist minister
Richard Land. Land dismisses as 'rubbish' suggestions
that the Bible is inaccurate and cannot be the basis
for political decisions. 'When you stand in judgment
of scripture, that is a theology of death,' says Land,
who has called for Iraq to be 'flooded' with U.S.
troops.

To Beckford such views are deeply alarming. 'This
was what surprised me most about my journey,
discovering how dangerous this fundamentalism can be,'
he said.

But Hilborn said: 'People have these wrong
perceptions. To see evangelicals as literalists is not
true. It's a multifarious movement; you have to give a
much more nuanced interpretation.'

Channel 4 defended its decision to screen the
documentary. 'To just be controversial would neither
be interesting nor valid. But when you have someone as intelligent and intelligible as Robert, you will see the program is extremely valid.'
 
I remember reading something, an analysis of The Book of Revelations that came to the same conclusion. That Revelations was a marketing campaign to bring 'pagans' to Christ.
 
rggraham said:
I remember reading something, an analysis of The Book of Revelations that came to the same conclusion. That Revelations was a marketing campaign to bring 'pagans' to Christ.

I took a course studying the Revelations of Saint John the Divine. Turns out that "Saint John the Divine" was not the John of the book of John (which is what I guess I assumed before I took the course). This particular John was a paranoid political troublemaker who was banished to some obscure Greek (I think) island for his political/religious extremism. This was a time of some persecution of Christians.

In response, John wrote this book promising the Christians that were being persecuted that the worm would turn and all of those fuckin' Romans would get theirs in the end.

According to my professor (who had a doctorate in theology), most of Revelations is a rant against the Romans, not some mystical prophetic promise of things to come.

St. John the Divine was a madman.
 
That was one of the things I remember best, that the John of John and the John of Revelations were two different people.

A bit of knowledge not widely known among the more adamant Christians.

Also I recall the the earliest copy of Revelations appeared one hundred years after the other Gospels, and is in different language (Greek?) rather the language (Hebrew? Aramaic?) the original Gospels are written in.
 
The copy of the Bible that I got at school was written by Clive Sugden of form 1D according to the signature. It also contains the assertation that the Chelsea Shed Boys are OK, which proves the antiquity of the sport of football.
 
The four gospels were written for specific audiences. Matthew was written for the Jews, so it filled with laws and dogma. John was written for the gnostics. It is far more ethereal, designed to appeal to non-Jews. It seems to me that Luke was written for the Greeks, but I can't recall that well. And I don't remember anything about Mark.

Also: the books that appear in the New Testament were selected by some North African cleric in the 4th or 5th century. He was a bishop who was trying to solidify his authority. By choosing which books belonged and which books did not belong in the bible, he was able to establish who were proper believers and who were heretics.

It was just a power grab by another avaricious and ambitious man, but it has determined what is considered to be the word of God and what is thought to be heretical for 2 millennia.

I love Christianity. It's so pure.
 
Last edited:
Everyone is welcome to his/her beliefs. And of course channel 4 are out to be contreversial and they'll do something even more so next christmas.

I don't know why people get all het up over other folks airing their views. Who knows how many people will watch and what kind of impact it will make? I'm betting not a lot really *L*

And revelation? well hey I guess we'll see come judgement day right ;)
 
thebullet said:
Bible Is 'Lies and Spin,' Says C4
By Jamie Doward
The Observer U.K.

Sunday 19 December 2004

'Sensationalist' film sparks anger among church
groups.
It's the season for Channel 4 to cause
controversy. Each year the channel strives to whip up
a furor surrounding its programming on Christmas Day.

If it is not trying to break the record for the most
f-words (2002), it's asking Ali G to present an
alternative Queen's speech (1999).

Now it has attracted anger from Christian groups
over its plans to screen a documentary which dismisses
some parts of the Bible as untrue and attacks others
as being a 'masterwork of spin'.

Evangelical groups are angry that Who Wrote the
Bible?
, which will go out at 8.30pm, paints a negative
picture of Christian organizations and suggests links
between them and the troubles in the Middle East.

They have also expressed concerns about the
presenter, Dr Robert Beckford, a reader in theology at Birmingham University. Beckford's critically acclaimed documentary God is Black, which compared white and black people's interpretation of Christianity, angered some in the Anglican church who accused it of 'racialising' religious issues.

'Channel 4 has a record of going for the more
controversial take on religion,' said David Hilborn,
head of theology at the Evangelical Alliance. 'They
want to go down the more sensational route to grab
people's attention.'


Beckford defended the provocative timing of the documentary. 'To have faith in the world is to ask dangerous questions. Why not make the question at Christmas when we hear about this son of God who was born in dubious circumstances in a place which was the armpit of the world?'

In the new documentary, Beckford, a committed
Pentecostal Christian, describes a journey he made to
some of Christianity's holiest places to help him
uncover the provenance of the Bible. He calls his
conclusion an 'earth-shattering experience' and one
that made him doubt some of his most basic Christian
beliefs.

Of the Old Testament, Beckford declares: 'The
so-called law of Moses turns out to be the work of
many human hands. What I once thought was the word of
God was now beginning to sound like something out of
Stalin's Russia.'

He produces archaeological evidence to suggest the
Bible's claims that the kingdoms of David and Solomon
dominated the 10th century BC were wrong, an error
that raises profound claims about the genesis of
Christianity.

He declares the New Testament a 'masterwork of
spin written by people who were nowhere near the
events they describe, all gathered by powerful editors
who kept out ideas they did not like'.

The story of the nativity is also doubted.
Beckford argues that Matthew added the story to
fulfill a prophecy made in the Old Testament.

One of the most revealing moments comes when
Beckford visits the U.S. state of Georgia to talk to
President Bush's spiritual adviser, Baptist minister
Richard Land. Land dismisses as 'rubbish' suggestions
that the Bible is inaccurate and cannot be the basis
for political decisions. 'When you stand in judgment
of scripture, that is a theology of death,' says Land,
who has called for Iraq to be 'flooded' with U.S.
troops.

To Beckford such views are deeply alarming. 'This
was what surprised me most about my journey,
discovering how dangerous this fundamentalism can be,'
he said.

But Hilborn said: 'People have these wrong
perceptions. To see evangelicals as literalists is not
true. It's a multifarious movement; you have to give a
much more nuanced interpretation.'

Channel 4 defended its decision to screen the
documentary. 'To just be controversial would neither
be interesting nor valid. But when you have someone as intelligent and intelligible as Robert, you will see the program is extremely valid.'

Wag the dog.
 
English Lady said:
Everyone is welcome to his/her beliefs. And of course channel 4 are out to be contreversial and they'll do something even more so next christmas.

I don't know why people get all het up over other folks airing their views. Who knows how many people will watch and what kind of impact it will make? I'm betting not a lot really *L*


Precicely. It's like Channel 4 says 'jump' and they do. Channel 4 is having all the fun (and making all the proffit)
 
Back
Top