BBC or DDE (Dumbing Down Easter)
Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley
The BBC are using the same computer technology that was used for ‘Walking with Dinosaurs’ for a documentary to be shown at Easter named, ‘Son of God’.
While their technology may be up to date, their thinking is certainly prehistoric when one reads of the documentary’s content.
As is typical of the new BBC, it seems that once again it could not provide Christians and interested non-believers with an accurate and factual, celebratory documentary about Easter, the crux of the Christian faith.
While it would not consider the slightest remark against the religions of the world lest it offend, familiarity (rather pseudo familiarity - as they no doubt have not read the Bible) certainly has bred contempt. As soon as the topic is Christianity, the BBC and other corporations seem to find amusement in seeing how much ridicule, misinformation and conjecture it can cram into a programme.
The claim that is made for, ‘Son of God’, is ‘that it will strip away all the myths surrounding Jesus and scrutinise the historical evidence’. Yet in the very next sentence we read:
‘Most controversially [!] the programme will attempt to fill in Jesus’ years as a child and will ask whether Jesus was really betrayed by Judas. It will look at the age-old claim that Jesus was still alive when his body was taken down from the cross.’
Strip away all the myths? More likely will put a few more in place! What reliable Christian, Biblical scholars have they sought during their investigating of the ‘evidence’? Why does controversy have to feature at all? Why is it that a relaying of the Bible narrative to the audience can not be delivered at face value and without additions by non-believers who produce the programme.
How can they fill in Jesus’ years as a child and what is the point? The Bible does not give an account and so any opinion or insertion into the documentary of such can only be myths and conjecture. It is an arguing from silence. This is the BBC preference because it is weak on presenting that clearly stated in the Bible - called the Truth. It has always proven to be most accurate, reliable, and appropriate throughout every age. Whatever man attempts, the Bible has the answer within, waiting and ready.
Further this ‘age-old claim’ as they put it, ‘as to whether Jesus was still alive when his body was taken down from the cross’ just proves the point - they have neither read nor understood the Bible accounts. The words of the Bible are not used carelessly. For those who seek they reveal much.
The ‘age-old claim’ was resolved at the time of the crucifixion. Perhaps they should experience their own crucifixion to see whether the likelihood is, that one would be alive after such an ordeal.
Jesus was butchered on that cross.
The centurion declared to Pilate that Jesus was dead and the soldiers (eyewitnesses) who broke the legs of the other two who had been crucified as they were still alive, also testified as to Jesus’ death.
So there again an opportunity of straight reporting of Easter is likely to fall into the same banality of ‘Songs of Praise’ and the series hosted by Melvynn Bragg and the nightly series of the Christmas ‘story’, reported in the television news style of today. The first propagates any thought, the second wallowed in conjecture and promoted blasphemous views of such persons as the former Bishop of Durham, and the latter being full of error, with the Kings arriving at the birth to quote but one example!
Perhaps the BBC should give majorities more of their programmes and inform rather than misinform, report the matter not create it and provide truth rather than promote their view. The television is invaded with sports programmes and yet more people attend church on Sunday than those who attend football matches on a Saturday! When a politician or government makes a statement we have to hear about from an ‘expert’ or correspondent who will tell us about (or is that interpret?) it. Let’s hear it from the source! The source is the complete picture, always.