The Bible—Episode Three Disappoints

Continuing our examination of the History Channel’s five-part series The Bible, the third episode that aired last night offered highs and lows, and overall I was disappointed. Serious factual errors marred the Exile narrative, and after studying 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Jeremiah and Daniel again today I have finally sorted out the problems. I understand the difficult choices that must be made in order to condense the story, but the episode entitled “Hope” gave wrong information. So, in order to equip my friends hoping to use the material for a Sunday school class, I offer my comments and corrections.

The period covered by this episode starts with the reign of the last king of Judah, Zedekiah, whose story is found in 2 Kings 24:15–25:7. It concludes with Jesus’ call to the fisherman Peter to follow him and “change the world.” Yikes! This is a span of about 600 years, much of which is called the “Intertestamental Period” (the four hundred years between the last word in the Old Testament and the opening of the New in approximately 4 BC).

The first segment depicting the fall of Jerusalem at the hand of Nebuchadnezzar and the exile was generally all right factually. It is the tale-end of a bitter and violent history, ending with the monarchy of Zedekiah.  The serious problems with chronology begin with the second segment featuring Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar (Neb) as the central characters.

In the left column, I have listed the events as they occurred in the show. On the right are the events in the order given in Scripture.

 So how was this narrative supposed to go?

1. Nebuchadnezzar did go insane, but it was temporary until he acknowledged the hand of almighty God. He was restored to health and wealth (Daniel 4:36). [factual error]

2. Neb was followed by Belshazzar, for whom Daniel interpreted the handwriting on the wall. [This particular omission is excusable under the “poetic license and condensation” rule.]

3. Belshazzar was followed by Darius, who is the Babylonian dictator forbidding prayer and throwing Daniel into the lion’s den. [factual error and chronological misplacement]

4. Cyrus, the Persian, came into power and was moved by God “out of the blue” according to 2 Chronicles 36, to let the Israelites go back to their homeland. Cyrus’ decree is not based on any particular “logical” motive, like witnessing the miracles of deliverance. This is an important point, because through it, God is demonstrating that history itself, under God’s sovereignty, is the judgment of God, and what God takes away from Israel at the hands of the Babylonians he restores through the agency of the Persians.

5. So, to be clear, Cyrus was not the king who prohibited praying. Such an obvious big error calls into question the research of the production team.

Having said all that, there were two moments in these segments that were moving and faith building for me: first, the gentle perseverance of Jeremiah and the consistency of his message. This was no mad man, and popularity did not dictate his content; and second, the appearance of God in the fiery furnace. The calm and wonder it elicited was somewhat negated by the panicked screams of the three Hebrew men, which I felt to be inconsistent with the biblical narrative. In Daniel 3, they show great poise heading into the furnace, and the story does not keep us in suspense about the arrival of the fourth figure. So I think there was a bit more drama here than the biblical text calls for. Nevertheless, when God shows up, everything changes!

And may I just say, it was cheesy to interrupt Daniel’s encounter with the lions right at the moment one expected his demise, and cut to commercials. Chalk that up to commercial television, an additional disappointment.

I’ve gone way over my self-imposed word limit here, so I will reserve the rest of my comments for next time. In my follow-up post I will evaluate the bridge between Old and New Testament and the introduction of Jesus.