Add a Review

  • The story itself tries to stay accurate to the Bible, but the commentators make a lot of assumptions that can be misunderstood as factual. If the stance of all the commentators were given before they speak, it would inform the audience that it was their opinion.
  • omah-hope16 April 2019
    Tried watching this,but as soon as filthy Rich Preacher Joel Osteen popped Up I was done.
  • I'm not a religous person but find religion very intresting. This series is very intresting and a very cool way to learn about the history of Christ.

    As many have said this series is mostly dramatization with commentary from biblical scholars. Some people may find the dramatization overdramatic.

    All in all I'm enjoying the series and wish that the other reviewers would calm down about the "innacuracy" of the series, I highly doubt these people are biblical scholars or have any sort of merit.

    Take this series for what it is.. It isn't meant to be the bible.
  • Folks im about as nerdy as they come when it's about history. Just finished reading through the New Testament for the 4th time. This show is way off lol. Like scary off. Not getting all crazy and sensitive here, its Nice acting, but I'm sorry, safe to assume many people are watching this to learn History. Please know specifically the commentary from random professors is so far off from history, its blowing my mind. indicating at times they do not understand the criteria that they are hired by the History Channel to apparently teach the viewer about.

    The Iowa professors' fill in Hypotheticals are killing me. Lol being positioned as historical fact, especially to those who are unread, Ugh it's like a punch in the gut. Lol Folks think that they are learning about Jesus when in fact they are getting some guy's creative imagination.

    Its akin, to say, a completely dyslexic individual teaching teaching children how to spell. They just guess, not even sound it out. Lol

    These professors At times Not even citing the historical documents, but choosing instead what seems to be their own made up Hypotheticals Completely contrary to what is recorded in history and The Bible. Might as well just not read at all??

    Problem is people will think that they are learning history Blows my mind for a "history channel". Illogical much??

    The pastors and priests appear to help a bit, As they tend to site more of the historical accounts, and Biblical documents, less on their personal hypotheticals and imagination.

    Know this is about as historically accurate as is the game of thrones. But I never said the acting was not entertaining. Lol
  • terryh-700541 April 2019
    Very liberal slant on Jesus. I stopped watching when it was implied that Jesus was first a disciple of John the Baptist, that he probably learned from John before starting His ministry. Unfortunately, this "documentary " could mislead those who do not know the truth as written in the Bible.
  • kylepintarelli30 March 2019
    4/10
    Weak
    Poorly Cast, Commentary is more conspiracy theory or suggestive as opposed to historically accurate or based on accepted dogma. Good production budget but just falls short overall.
  • Read your Bible instead of watching this program. The goal of the History Channel is not to present the Bible accurately. The intent of the of Jesus: His Life is to make money for their network by stirring up controversy and doubt, like many other programs on this network.

    Seriously. I'm not joking. Read the Bible instead.

    You should be aware that the History Channel is the source for Ancient Aliens, and other sensationalist anti-history.

    But let us compare the Bible with an example of the History Channel's use of the Bible in Jesus: His Life episode 1.

    The Annunciation starts at minute 7 in the program. It is very clear at the outset of this episode that the History Channel's producers and writers desire to inject the heresy of Pelagianism into the biblical text.

    Pelagius was a late 4th and early 5th century British priest who denied the Scripture's teaching that humans inherited original sin and are by nature enemies of God. In place of this Pelagius taught that every individual was capable of choosing to do God's will and be saved through their own choice. Pelagius' teachings were recognized as unbiblical and condemned as false doctrine by numerous church councils and confessions (including Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Reformed) from the early 5th century to this day. His views are rightly considered heretical. And the heresy of Pelagius has been embraced by a many today who teach that they are Christian.

    According to the Bible the angel Gabriel greets Mary:

    "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end." (Luke 1:30-33 NKJV)

    According to the History Channel's Jesus: His Life Gabriel says:

    "Mary, do not be afraid, for you have found favor with God. If you choose to accept His plan, you will conceive in your womb and give birth, a Son."

    First, note the bold italics. These are words the History Channel chose as replacements for the rest of what Gabriel said in the Bible. It is important to notice what they are eliminating: They eliminate the words of Gabriel which declare that Jesus is the Eternal God coming into human flesh according to the promises made to David and Jacob.

    They replace this confession of Christ with something that did not happen. Gabriel never appealed to Mary "to accept" God's "plan." And Gabriel never told Mary that Christ would only be conceived "if" she chose "to accept".

    Eliminating the words of Scripture about the Divine Human Savior, the History Channel teaches the fiction that Mary's decision to follow God was the focus of this Biblical text.

    Mary's response to Gabriel comes next.

    According to the Bible, Mary responds:

    "How can this be, since I do not know a man?" (Luke 1:34)

    History Channel, Mary:

    "How can this happen? I am a virgin."

    The History Channel does make clear that at this point Mary was a virgin. So at least at this point in the show the Virgin birth is not denied.

    The Gabriel of the Bible, says:

    "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God. Now indeed, Elizabeth your relative has also conceived a son in her old age; and this is now the sixth month for her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible." (Luke 1:35-37)

    History Channel Gabriel says something completely different:

    "Nothing is impossible with the Almighty. The Holy Spirit will visit you. The child you bear will become the greatest of men. He will be called the Son of God."

    Eliminated from the Bible is the actual divinity of Christ, and in place of this the History Channel claims that at some time in the future this son of hers will become great and be called the Son of God. The Bible's Gabriel points to Elizabeth and in her the promise of the Forerunner. The History Channel eliminates the fulfillment of the Prophetic Word. The History Channel Gabriel speaks in a way which is consistent with the heresy of Adoptionism: the false teaching that Jesus wasn't really the Eternal God who became human, but rather that Jesus was a miraculously conceived man who later in life was adopted by God at His baptism and was given the title "Son of God."

    In the Bible, Mary responds:

    "Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word."

    And at this point the Bible says:

    And the angel departed from her.

    But the History Channel is not done with its version of Mary and Gabriel.

    History Channel has Mary saying

    "Why has He chosen me?"

    To which the History Channel's Gabriel says:

    "You are pure of heart and soul. Will you accept this gift?"

    History Channel Mary says:

    "Here am I, servant of the Lord."

    This fictional interchange embraces the heresy of Pelagianism.

    This interchange may have been included as a nod toward the Roman Catholic teaching of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. That is, that she was also conceived and born without the contamination of original inherited sin. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was officially adopted by the Roman Catholic church by Pope Pius IX in 1854. This view of Mary became widely held through late antiquity. It is not a Biblical teaching, it was accepted as Church doctrine in the Roman Church based on the authority of the Pope.

    History Channel Gabriel's fictional question "Will you accept this gift?" implies that she was, at least, if not also other humans, in a position of moral freedom with regard to the Will of God. This is the same kind of moral freedom the Church condemned as Pelagianism from the 5th century and on.

    Summary Don't bother watching the show. Read the Bible instead.

    Some might object to this review as if it were cherry-picking evidence. Shame on you for excusing such false teaching. And may God bring you to repentance and faith.

    This review could be many times longer on many more errors and serious heresies and false doctrines promoted in Jesus: His Life. I could have focused on the many baseless and false claims made by the commentators. I could have focused on the whole web of fictional background invented by the writers to frame the episode around their imaginings of what Joseph must have gone through, the fictional conversations between Joseph, Mary, and the people around them. All of which are a load of invented dreck. The invented stories about Jesus have no value at all in teaching us more about who He is or His work for us.

    But what matters is how the producers represent the actual Scriptures, the Word of God. (Here understand that Joel Osteen is named, among others.) What do they take out? What do they add?

    Here we have seen what they subtract: Christ as the Prophesied Incarnation of the Eternal Divine Son of God as Savior.

    Here we have seen with what they replace Christ: The idea of free moral ability to choose to do what God wants, so that God can bless us. That is, the heresy of Pelagianism. And this heresy is often the foundation of both the Prosperity Gospel, the Social Gospel, and false teachers promoting the Word of Faith heresy.

    Read your Bible instead.

    Joseph Abrahamson
  • sue-7762710 April 2019
    I have enjoyed this series so far in that it joins history with the Bible. I like the historical commentary. Several of the commentators are completely secular and just make stuff up re what Jesus and others were thinking. I take all that with a grain of salt.

    The John The Baptist hour was ridiculous in that it totally twisted the reason John existed & why he preached. The rest have been good esp the hour from Mary's. point of view. I found it quite moving.

    The Caephus hour enlightened me re his role vs Pilates role and gave me a better understanding of the Sanhedrin.

    I'm a believer and have enjoyed this series so far. I've found it educational. I am interested in secular commentary whether I agree with it or not!
  • I Have watched lots of Biblical Movies and Documentries but this TV Series is a master piece. Really Heart touching. Weldone the Cast and the Crew
  • I'm in love with this documentary,, i've read the other reviews and i think people are completely wrong because this is a documentary series so you should not focus on actors' performance or the director or any thing other than the story and what the documentary is explaining and detailing about jesus life at time and the story itself, thanks for all the details and for showing us the life of jesus from the eye of the persons living in that time specifically
  • This series is spectacularly cast and produced. For one of the first times the viewers get to see what people in that time and era might have actually looked like. And the first person perspective is a unique and different view on the greatest story ever told. That being said, the content was confusing a good deal and contradicting the sources which it claims to have sited. I can only speak from a Biblical point of view, being a scholar myself, and say that many of the portrayals contradict things that are portrayed in all the gospels-there fore should be included/referenced. As opposed to portraying characters as being confused when all sources indicate they were sure-I speak primarily of the John the Baptist episode that portrays John as not knowing who Jesus was after baptising him let alone claiming Jesus did not know who He was til he was baptised which contradicts the primary sourcing of this docuseries. This production is supposed to ONLY cover what other could have thought and does not have the authority to say Jesus thought anything aside of what the Bible says of him-as this production claims in advertisements. So disappointed in that end.
  • What attracted me to watch the three episodes (so far), was the fact that the actors look the part, from the region, miracles happen without any enhancements or celestial interventions. for those who never heard about Jesus, this is a good start, and for those who know a lot about Jesus, then watch and tell us more. it is always good to watch such life stories.
  • This is not a documentary...but rather a dramatization supported by commentary about life in Biblical times. Whenever a dramatic production approaches the Christ story people become outraged. Such is the way of the world. They responded the same way with Jesus Christ Superstar. If any aspect plays contrary to the way they want to know the characters and events involved, emotions take over. And thanks to the Internet...some feel determined to voice their opinions. Next.
  • I take a different approach to secular productions of the Bible; I don't expect them to be accurate, and this one doesn't seem to rise above that low expectation. I've watched the first two episodes, so I don't think that's enough to rate the series, or comment more fully. Right now, I'd give it one star. That might drop to no star, but it's doubtful it will climb to two stars. If I can stick with the series, I'll probably post a more detailed review.
  • Its Brill, but jesus was on a stake not a cross but it's very good ,good acting, good story it's so so close to the bible it had me in tears at times ,and it's so good to know he will be back to help us all ,so yeah worth watching 10 out of 10 I recommend anyone to watch this, esp if you have done bad things in your life, Brill series the best by far, watch this it's so so good , learn ,read watch this , God bless us all and remember God and jesus is watching us all , it's such a good story as jesus saved me as I tried to kill myself 5 times now I'm still here ,so yeah love that series thanks for reading, Rick lionheart stark see me on YouTube Rick lionheart stark thanks.
  • Format is documentary. It's an odd topic for a documentary. I see Producers listed, but no Writers. I'd like to know their credentials.
  • No one will be converted to Christianity by this UK production.

    A dumbing down of Jesus as The Christ and of His mission. Mary and Joseph are poorly represented in this drama.

    It is a shame the producers of this did not bother to verify facts. They should have consulted Jewish references and texts as to the practices and the living out of Jewish traditions and practices. Instead we get selected commentators spouting their own opinions....even contradicting themselves in a later episode.

    So very much of what Jesus said and did is lost in this series. The New Testament is to be read and understood in the light of the Old; so much mis - interpretation is being presented......BUT the elevation of the bread and wine to the body and blood of Christ in the Seder is absolutely accurate. Thank you for this.

    The producers had a chance to do something really good here.
  • They used the best actor to portray Jesus in this movie. I very much enjoy the movie and watched it so many times.
  • It's sad to see The History Channel selling information based on the alleged perspectives of New Testament figures as "history." While there are accounts by historians written after the time of Jesus' life asserting that a man named Jesus was preaching to his fellow Jews about his unique connection to their God, and one mention is made of Jesus' brother being executed, that's all. That doesn't stop the history channel from presenting the New Testament accounts of Jesus' life, execution, and resurrection as if they are confirmed by historical evidence of some sort. The only evidence cited to support this is the New Testament itself and numerous theological scholars who obviously have a bias in assuming what's in the New Testament is historical fact. It's sad to see The History Channel, which could have interesting programming based on historical research, resort to this to get ratings.
  • I liked that the scenes are interspersed by commentary from experts. I learned a lot. However, I just could not get past Mary Magdalene's mascara. Beautifully applied to enhance her eyes. But did they really wear Maybelline back in the day?
  • This is the most biblically accurate production I have seen. I love the format. Great job!👍🏻👍🏻 A must-see!1
  • Could not get past the first 15 minutes. When they showed Joseph throw a fit of rage and break his home and furniture and tools and three commentator claims that Joseph reacted like everyone does I had to stop. First that is an insult to Joseph and men everywhere to suggest the normal everyone reaction is fits of rage I just felt like this is absurd. While much of Joseph and Mary was common and average also much was amazing and extinguisher. History totally missed the boat on what made then common and what made then special and great. Very disappointed. What do these things always have to go over board in the wrong ways. Either to sanitary or to dirty.
  • Loved the story of Jesus life hated the commentary very mixed up message in condescending cut them out it could have be great 8 star
  • gastonpoire5 May 2019
    Again people controlling the money are also controlling the story.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I won't comment on the accuracies, as many others already have in their reviews. I'm guessing that most who watch this already know the story of Jesus, thus what took place.

    What we have is the story of Jesus told with perspective of those in his life: Mary, Joseph, John the Baptist, Mary Magdalene, etc. That's ludicrous in the you've essentially got writers telling us what these people were thinking and feeling. THEN ... to top it off, every few mins we have religious "scholars" and authors telling us what everyone was thinking and feeling at the time. And speculating on motives. Also, make sure you get as many ethnic scholars as you can, to be politically correct and inclusive.

    Tell the story as written, but don't presume to tell us what people were thinking or feeling.

    And of course Joel "the money minister" Osteen would stick his face in there, all over the show.
An error has occured. Please try again.