Is anyone else slightly offended by the fact that the Life of Jesus is on the "History" channel? I have similar issues with ancient aliens... I just feel that a vehicle purporting to pertain to History should stick to verifiable historical events... Not pseudo-science or religion...
9
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
25 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
I agree and have written several letters to the National Geographic magazine for this sort of crap. Problem they don't seem to see is that by playing in the middle they antagonize the 'faithful' (us who want to see the truth). It's called pandering and it ends up doing more harm than good.
JackPedigo
Level 9
Apr 10, 2019
3
I agree that it's not history but it's still better than programming shit like Mama June, Swamp People, or Duck Dynasty. At least an examination of the Jesus myth isn't an exercise in brain death.
Sgt_Spanky
Level 8
Apr 10, 2019
3
i have not watched the history channel for years because i am more than slightly offended. i am slightly offended when the science channel does this kind of thing. i am WAY offended when the history channel does because these days it's ALL the history channel does: how the masons' secret plot to call aliens back to kill jesus again is causing earthquakes isn't history.
g
genessa
Level 8
Apr 10, 2019
2
I found a number of things on the history channel when it was available to me that I found questionable
oldFloyd
Level 8
Apr 10, 2019
2
I'm actually more offended by ancient aliens.
bornagainatheist1
Level 4
Apr 10, 2019
2
Fair. That show annoys the crap out of me... Especially the fact that it seems to dominate H2, at least in Canada...
I'm not offended by ancient aliens. I like to see all the ancient structures, such as the pyramids and the buildings in the mountains of Peru, and all over the world, which ARE history. How did those get there? Obviously they're ancient. Did aliens put them there? Who knows? Ancient man? Didn't do them by hand.
Not at all. If there is an academic question to be asked, let’s ask it. Art, science, religion and many other disciplines all have relevant, historical narratives that inform our current position. Better to explore than ignore!
Geoffrey51
Level 8
Apr 11, 2019
1
I agree with the idea. I think religion should be taught as part of our history, my objection is the portrayal of him as though he was an actual person as told by the people who were there... That's actually in the description. :/
@Veldoran I am sure that would be the tin making the product look attractive. I’ve not seen the show and I don’t know the nature of the content that History Channel present but certainly interesting content to explore the lifestyle, beliefs, etc. of C1st Judea and the Roman occupation
@Geoffrey51 Yeah... unfortunately, that isn't at all how it's presented. :/
@Veldoran that’s a shame ?
I stopped watching that channel due to all the bullshit they kept showing. It's been this way for a very long time now.
Redheadedgammy
Level 9
Apr 10, 2019
1
I actually enjoy looking at religious documentaries
mrveggieman187
Level 6
Apr 10, 2019
1
Documentaries, sure. The life as Jesus as a biography told by "those who were there" (literally part of the commercial), not so much.
I actually think that ALL religions should be taught... would give people a lot more perspective IMO
I'm not offended. It's a business. Like all other private networks including news networks, they are in the business of selling airtime to advertisers. Advertisers buy blocks of time, priced based on what the network can empirically prove average viewership is for any given block of time. For the same reason that MTV no longer shows music videos, History Channel only puts on programming that it can prove increases viewership. It's hard to have principles in busness if you can't afford to pay the bills. At this point, I'm surprised that they don't just show reruns of COPS 24 hours a day.
AndrewInVail
Level 6
Apr 10, 2019
1
I agree. Saw that on my channel guide last night and thought "WTF"?
KKGator
Level 9
Apr 10, 2019
1
The worst part was that there was actual commentary along with the story from religious experts who gave "insight" into the events portrayed in the story... I watched about 8 minutes of it somewhere in the middle before I changed it... :/
Not really more than any other mythology really.
Fairy tales make us human and get an understanding of ourselves.
BufftonBeotch
Level 8
Apr 11, 2019
0
I agree with that. My issue is with the "idea" that it's factual history. It's not the content that I have issue with, it's the presentation. 
Stories are great. I have no issue with the History of Batman being shown on the History channel... However, if they had a Biography of Bruce Wayne, with commentary from Commissioner Gordon and Harvey Dent purporting to be factual accounts... I'd have an issue with that. LOL
@Veldoran Now that’s a show I’d definitely be watching!
@Veldoran Not understanding they are myths lead to problems.
The History channel has been garbage for more than a decade. Ancient aliens? No thanks. I miss the good old days when it was the Nazi channel.
Watch this real documentary on Christ.
indirect76
Level 7
Apr 10, 2019
0
Maybe this is the book used by a church I drive past called NHIM. This is part of the modern movement in which everything is really just about Jesus. Apparently he's all you needs.
Not at all... come on we are few compare to the believers. Just like I don’t get offended to say “one nation under god”... it is what it is! I’m just glad I was able to open my eyes and see the real truth!
latinstingray
Level 4
Apr 10, 2019
0
That's should be offensive for the reason that it's not how the founders of the nation envisioned it. :/
@Veldoran ...if my memory serves me right from history didn’t the founders of our nation are here because they were religious? They left England so they can have freedom of religion. So how is it that your using the founders of our nation as means of being offensive when they in fact believe in god? Before you answer someone you need to know your history...
@latinstingray [thoughtco.com]
Also - In the United States, the federal constitution makes no reference to God
@Veldoran is that why the pledge of allegiance does reference to god! It was great talking to you. 
@latinstingray Wasn't in the original pledge. It was added in 1954>
“Under God” Added. to the Pledge of Allegiance (1954) It was on this date, June 14, 1954, that President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed a Congressional resolution which added the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance.
Yeah... History is important. 
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.