The Chosen

Janie23 said:

Trying to come up with a plausible context for Thomas's doubt is obviously why the whole Ramah storyline was invented, but I found it unsatisfying. (I have other concerns about the Thomas storyline which I find more troubling.)

Click to expand...

I felt gut punched when I watched that scene.

I recommend you watch the Dallas Jenkins interview of why they depicted Jesus not bring her back. It's solid meat and not baby milk Christianity;

1. After coming to Christ, bad things can still happen to you.
2. God does not always answer your prayers the way you want.
3. He is still God and we are still expected to follow and obey.
4. He is with us on the mountain top of glory and the valley of suffering and it has purpose even if we don't understand it.

Wrangler said:

I recommend you watch the Dallas Jenkins interview of why they depicted Jesus not bring her back. It's solid meat and not baby milk Christianity;

Click to expand...

Just the same, Jesus healed all, no exceptions. This is antichrist, presenting a false Jesus, in direct contradiction to the Bible.

Much love!

Janie23 said:

Other questions, like why Thomas would have been so "doubting," seem to have been ham-fistedly put in place. Trying to come up with a plausible context for Thomas's doubt is obviously why the whole Ramah storyline was invented, but I found it unsatisfying. (I have other concerns about the Thomas storyline which I find more troubling.)

Click to expand...

Actually Jesus had told the disciples that if someone told them He was in the inner room, don't believe them. Thomas was doing exactly what Jesus has told them to do.

People call him "doubting Thomas", but they should call him "obedient Thomas".

Much love!

Wrangler said:

Unlike other works portraying Jesus as above it all, this really humanizes the man and explores the emotional depth of events Scripture glosses over.

Click to expand...

Interesting way of saying "making up stories that are not in the Bible as if they were, for the purpose of projecting onto Jesus and the disciples from the writer's humanist thoughts".

Much love!

marks said:

Just the same, Jesus healed all, no exceptions.

Click to expand...

You don't know this but are reading it into the text. If a story shows a character only eating apples, it does not mean that he only eats apples.

Regarding spiritual healing, Jesus left many to their own devices.

marks said:

Interesting way of saying "making up stories that are not in the Bible as if they were, for the purpose of projecting onto Jesus and the disciples from the writer's humanist thoughts".

Much love!

Click to expand...

Yea - no. Christian art. Learn it. Love it. Promote it.

Wrangler said:

I felt gut punched when I watched that scene.

I recommend you watch the Dallas Jenkins interview of why they depicted Jesus not bring her back. It's solid meat and not baby milk Christianity;

1. After coming to Christ, bad things can still happen to you.
2. God does not always answer your prayers the way you want.
3. He is still God and we are still expected to follow and obey.
4. He is with us on the mountain top of glory and the valley of suffering and it has purpose even if we don't understand it.

Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, I never liked Ramah that much -- not that I had any good reason not to like her, I just didn't, possibly a reaction to how the actress would scrunch her nose. Also, I knew some kind of scene like that was coming -- I was looking up why the actor who played Phillip had changed, and saw that the Ramah character was being written out. Spoilers, eh?

I didn't have any objection to why Jenkins wanted to do this with her character.

My larger concern with the Thomas storyline, on the other hand, has to do with his FlashBack in 5x07, where he witnesses his father being arrested. That scene says his brothers' names are Didymus and Judas. This is a literary reference to The Gospel of Thomas, which begins, begins: "These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke and Didymus Judas Thomas wrote them down." It was found at Nag Hammadi along with a large cache of Gnostic texts.

Gnosis -- the "experience" that Gnostics attempt to invoke -- directly relates to John 20: 24-29. In this passage, Thomas declares with reference to Christ's resurrection, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.” Eight days later, Jesus comes to Thomas and the other disciples, and rebukes Thomas: "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." Which, to me, also functions as a rebuke of the Gnostic project itself.

Where does faith fit in when one has already seen?

Janie23 said:

Where does faith fit in when one has already seen?

Click to expand...

That’s THE question man has wrestled with since the Garden.

I hate faith and aspire to god like knowledge, which explains why Adam and Eve are the forbidden fruit.

Knowledge is important to be sure. John 17:3, knowing the Father is to have life in the age to come. However, God tells us faith in him is the only way to please him.

Wrangler said:

You don't know this but are reading it into the text. If a story shows a character only eating apples, it does not mean that he only eats apples.

Click to expand...

Mat_4:24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

Mat_8:16 When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick:

Mat_12:15 But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;

Luk_4:40 Now when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them.

Luk_6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people out of all Judaea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases;

Luk_6:19 And the whole multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him, and healed them all.

Are you getting the idea?

Surmising there may be exceptions to this is you reading into the text, I should say.

Much love!

marks said:

Are you getting the idea?

Surmising there may be exceptions to this is you reading into the text, I should say.

Click to expand...

Nope. Logic remains a weak point for you. You cannot even address the point of logic that just because a story shows a character only eating apples, it does not mean that he only eats apples.

You cannot see the IDOL you've created. Jesus eats apples and anyone who says otherwise is an anti-Christ. Wow!

shepherdsword said:

There was also an episode where Thomas visited Mary Magdalene and showed her his manuscript. He noted that she was also in the process of writing something very important.....sounded like veiled reference to the Gospel of Mary, another gnostic text.

Click to expand...

It believe that scene was between Matthew and Mary, but yes, she was definitely writing something. I hadn't considered, though, that it was reference to The Gospel of Mary.

(BTW, I like your user name. It reads as both "shepherds word" and "shepherd sword.")

Anyways, at first blush, I struggle to find much connection between Mary's words at the end of that episode, and that gnostic text. But her words at the end of the episode do have some gnostic characteristics -- there's a measure of a "union of opposites" when she talks about the sweet and the bitter, and the darkness and the light.

More striking to me was how that episode (and the preceding one) started ramping up its use of the language and techniques of another gnostic televisual text, one with which I am too familiar.

I wanted to come back to a strand from earlier in the thread:

Wrangler said:

Yes. Absolutely. Yes or no answers please:

1. Was the girl sleeping (or dead)?
2. Was Solomon’s temple re-built in 3 days?
3. Is cannibalism approved by God in the OT?
4. Is it reasonable to speak in parables and be frustrated people don’t get what is being said?
5. Is not answering a direct question directly consistent with telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Click to expand...

You'd need to point me to what you're referencing with 2 and 3, but I think I can answer the other ones.

However, I don't think point 1 can be answered "yes or no." Because on point 1, I think "sleep" is a metaphor. Metaphor is the use of one (better known and especially directly experience) domain to structure and talk about another (less known, more abstract, not typically directly experienced) domain.

To say she was sleeping is to employ a metaphor, to say that Death is a Sleep, and use our experience of Sleep to organize our thoughts about Death. In that particular passage, the metaphor is apt.

Now, to point 4. It is reasonable to speak in parables (metaphors) and be frustrated that people don't "get it," especially when the target domain (i.e., The Kingdom of God) is difficult to understand in the first place, on account of it being something that isn't directly experienced. Indeed, as to point 5, it may be that when talking about something like The Kingdom of God, the only language available is, in fact, metaphorical; I'm not sure it's possible to speak of such "directly."

I get why some folks love The Chosen, it’s not word-for-word from the Bible, and the creators have said they’re adding stuff to make it interesting and watchable for people who don’t usually pick up a Bible. With so little worth watching on TV these days, I can see the appeal of something that draws a christian crowd.

The issue is not whether the show is moving. The issue is whether it gives people the Jesus of Scripture or a Jesus shaped by imagination.

God did not leave us guessing about His Son. He gave us His written Word. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” ~2 Timothy 3:16. That means Scripture is not lacking what we need. It is not sitting there waiting for filmmakers to fill in the gaps.

So if someone watches it, they had better know their Bible first. Because once fictional dialogue, invented scenes, and imagined personality traits start teaching how people think about Christ, they are no longer being formed only by the Word. They are being formed by somebody’s creative version of the story just like a lot of people on Christian forums.

That is dangerous ground.

Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” ~John 17:17. He did not say sanctify them through emotional storytelling. But yes many preachers do this every Sunday. He did not say sanctify them through dramatic additions. Yes that also happens every Sunday in many churches. He said God’s Word is truth.

So yes, we should discuss it. Watch with discernment if we choose to watch it. But never let a screen become the lens through which we read Scripture. Let Scripture be the judge of the screen. The Word of God is the standard, not the production value, not the acting, not the emotion, and not the crowds reaction.

bdavidc said:

They are being formed by somebody’s creative version of the story just like a lot of people on Christian forums.

Click to expand...

I've seen this over and over, even with people who know the Bible more than many others do. Yes, these stories get implanted in their minds . . . instead of the real Jesus, which is by definition antichrist.

Much love!

Janie23 said:

However, I don't think point 1 can be answered "yes or no." Because on point 1, I think "sleep" is a metaphor. Metaphor is the use of one (better known and especially directly experience) domain to structure and talk about another (less known, more abstract, not typically directly experienced) domain.

Click to expand...

Jesus answered from His perspective, while some humans seem to demand Jesus speak from their perspective, and if not "Jesus is a liar!!" Hardly!!

Much love!

Janie23 said:

Because on point 1, I think "sleep" is a metaphor.

Click to expand...

Right. And there in lies the deception! In context, when people ask you over and over again is she dead, that is not the time to keep sticking to a metaphor. Eventually, the deceiver figured it out and ultimately stated the non-metaphorical truth; She was not “sleeping.”

Just think about how convenient it is to deny every accusation of lying with; well, that was metaphorically speaking?

This is especially true in the context that begins with the girl is dead. Everyone is reacting to a dead girl. It’s not polite to speak of it as metaphorical sleep as the vulgar cat is already out of the bag. The least a decent person can do is respect everyone’s grasp of reality and not chose that time to make some bizarre semantic point. There are hits and there are misses. And that was a BIG TIME miss on many levels!

Jesus is often credited with being the ultimate example of what it looks like to be compassionate. Not in this scene.

Janie23 said:

Indeed, as to point 5, it may be that when talking about something like The Kingdom of God, the only language available is, in fact, metaphorical; I'm not sure it's possible to speak of such "directly."

Click to expand...

Q. Are you the Messiah? Are you the king?
A1. Yes.
A2. Well, you say it.

A2 is not a direct answer to a simple direct question? No ‘may be‘ about it.

marks said:

I pity you.

Click to expand...

Easier than dealing with the objective evidence of deception.