Discussion

Dear FRONTLINE,

In the past I've depended on Frontline for accurate, thorough reporting. However, this series on Jesus was extremely disappointing. Nothing of the "soul" of the history of Christianity was communicated and the almost flippant treatment of long-cherished beliefs concerning Christianity on the part of the scholars interviewed made for mind-numbing television. The show was boring and it failed to uncover the controversy among theologians concerning the evidence it presented. You shouldn't have bothered doing the show if you couldn't meet your normal Frontline standards. I grade it a C-

Gene DeLoux

Colorado Springs, CO

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a graduate student who studies the history of Christianity, I very much appreciated the presentation of current scholarship on the historical Jesus and early Christianity. The quality of the program and the scholars consulted is superb. I think it is imperative that PBS provide a non-confessional (that is, not representing the views of any one sect of Christianity) view of such a controversial subject, and you have done this well. My reading of the previous letters to Frontline about this series has reassured me how important it is to present history apart from theology. It is important for us to remember that we can't know what people in the past really believed, and we must take into account the paucity and, yes, sometimes unreliability of our sources about the past. I hope to see many more programs of such quality from Frontline in the future and I look forward to the rest of the series.

Stephanie Sleeper

Pomona, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I was born in Jerusalem to a very old and established Jewish family. I just recently started studying the New Testament and speaking with a lot of Christians about Jesus, who I feel to be undeniable. What I find to be missing in people's accounts of him is his lack of Jewishness. It's as if Christianity has taken Judaism away from Jesus. I found your program to be refreshing because it addresses this issue. Also, I just read a score of comments by people who feel your program lacked "faith" and was too intellectual, but from the get-go I understood that this was to be a historical presentation, and obviously not inclusive. Congratulations!!

Rachel Figg

Santa Fe, NM

Dear FRONTLINE,

Dear Frontline, Part 1 ,in my estimation, was outstanding. As a long time teacher of an adult Bible course, I have found that few christians actually read their Bible much less try and understand the history of the time of Christ and it's influence on our resulting Bible. There are even fewer that realize there were many "Gospels" in circulation and many different ideas of Christ before our Bible was fixed. Thanks for an excellent 2 hours. I look forward to tonight's program. John Moore

Clinton, TN

Dear FRONTLINE,

I was impressed by the sense in inquiry that characterized this program--it was investigative without being judgemental. Reading some of the other comments in this forum, I get the sense that "inquiry" is not what some of your viewers expected and this is truly sad. We are all free to believe whatever we want, yet it is valuable to listen to the insights which archaeology, textual criticism, history and comparative religion have to offer. Strangely enough, before I entered this forum, I was reading over your site's presentation of the textual emergence of the gospels and the conflict between christianity and judaism and I am struck by how the need for orthodoxy so often divides us all and amidst the strife distracts us from inquiring into those very truths within ourselves that institutionalized religions attempt to codify. In a sense, perhaps that is the real historical tragedy of the movement from jesus to christ.

randall potts
randall@sirius.com
san francisco, ca

Dear FRONTLINE,

The title of your program, "From Jesus to Christ," reveals the disinterested perspective that dominates - that Jesus was changed into Christ after he died, not that He was the Christ all along. The program presents an historical-archeaological view only, one which leaves out the primary portrayal of Jesus in the Bible itself - that He was the Son of God and Savior of the world. Paul is portrayed as a missionary without a "mission." His travels and letters are described without discussion of his faith and earnest love for others. Two of your scholars suggest that the reason people joined the early "Jesus people" was because they "liked the rituals" or because they wanted an "opportunity to become a leader" in a new organization! These suppositions run contrary to the reasons described in the Bible itself! Those early believers might have joined because they wanted to know God! Isn't that a possibility? If your historical scholars were thorough historians, they would at least consider the history and the content of the work itself as self-explanatory. Why trust the writings of Josephus or Cimbalene (of the 13th century). Are they any more reliable than Paul or John? How do they know who is most reliable? Would a literary scholar explain the world Jane Austen lived in without looking at her novels and allowing them to explain her world? And she meant to write fiction! The Bible writers and Paul meant to write a history of faith! While the additional writings of Josephus, etc. help to bring even more understanding of the world of Christ, it only seems fair and reasonable to let the original writers and explain the movement as they saw it.

Barbara Adler
adlerb@ccaa.edu
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Dear FRONTLINE,

The "experts" refer to Christianity as a "JEWISH" SECT. Saul was a Jew who killed Christians, was converted to Christianity, became known as Paul, converted many Jews as well as Gentiles to Christianity. The questions on circumcision and food came from Jews who became Christians & were questioning how God's law fits into the "Way." In no WAY were people becoming Jews to become Christian. The broadcast had a lot of great history told by people who OBVIOUSLY don't know what Chritianity is all about who twisted facts with THEIR understanding of how events related to the times. God's Word says deceivers will come to deceive even the elect, if it were possible. Too bad that many will not even study prayerfully through the Bible due to the supposed "enlightened, educated" people who don't even know Christians are NOT Jewish. The Jews are God's CHOSEN. The Gentiles are able to be a part of the Kingdom if they believe, trust & obey.

Sharon Kidd
skidd1143@aol.com
Vandalia, OH

Dear FRONTLINE,

Thank you for presenting some serious scholarship on the question of Christianity's origins. I have been fascinated by this subject as a key to how the religion has gotten to where it is now---and in my own attempts to understand my own origins, having been raised in a Christian milieu.

My own researches have taken me into other intriguing literature, and I am wondering about their omission. Principle among them is the Dead Sea Scrolls and the scholarship surrounding them. I have been particularly intrigued by the work of Barbara Thiering of a university in Sydney, Australia (Sydney University?), who has a very deep understanding, I think, to contribute to this debate. I would like to know why this body of scholarship was not broached in your series. I was also wondering why you called upon so few scholars in your series. While I am generally pleased with the scholarship and articulateness of those people (and I have no wish to see confusing controversy by introducing belief-oriented comments from "conservative" sources), it leaves the impression that there are no (or few) others who share this path of scholarship, when I know that there are many more who follow this path of study.

I can well imagine that to present materials even more radical than those shown would have introduced an element of controversy that some might have considered to be beyond the pale. I am not surprised to see discomfort and defensiveness expressed in many responses by those who take a literalist and belief-oriented approach to the life of Jesus and the early history of the Christian faiths. I'm sure that this programming was closely watched by many Christians, and that most of the letters you are receiving express displeasure at what has been presented.

So, I want to squarely express my admiration of the objectivity that Frontline has once again shown, leading us right into the realm of controversy. It is so often the case that the truth lies outside what people want to believe. I hope that you will not let the negativity of some prevent you from continuing on in this vein of inquiry (in this subject matter), or from re-airing the current 4-hour series.

Thank you again for a thought-provoking and informative program. PBS has done it again!

Regards,

Terry Lamb

Spring Valley, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

Thank you for your scholarly presentation of what we know about Christianity, as opposed to what we would like to believe. Some glaring omissions in my Christian education were the existence of James, the very human brother of Jesus and the active persecution of other followers of Christ by Constantine for his own political purposes. Certainly this hero of orthodoxy ignored his own sacred texts in forcing Jesus to the service of Mannon. He and the Nicene bishops defined what is sacred and robbed the world of the diverse mystic visions attributed to our Prophet of love and simplicity. The perennial message for our day remains treating others as we would be treated; your courageous exploration of the ambiguities in our most treasured tradition again teaches us the wisdom of humility and tolerance. May the defenders of "gospel truth" know the blessings of an open mind and heart.

michael stine
stinemi@kpnw.org
Portland, Oregon

Dear FRONTLINE,

Dear Frontline,

I enjoyed parts of your program on Jesus and the origins of Christianity. The archeological information was indeed interesting. I appreciate that the controversies inherent in this sort of an undertaking would be such that most people would be discouraged from attempting it. Your effort is therefore commendable. That effort was flawed, however, in attempting to explain by purely human motives and intellect what cannot be explained without dealing with God. You cannot consider Jesus without Him; Jesus never did. You also cannot consider the church without the Holy Spirit; they are inextricably intertwined. Understanding that the Spirit indwells Jesus' followers and remains a force in this world is absolutely essential to understanding Christians. It is also senseless to try to explain the motives of Paul and the others in terms of human self-interest while ignoring their own self-proclaimed feelings of intense love and immense gratitude for God's immeasurable gift. Your program focused on rivalry and political agendas but completely ignored the actual purpose and center of their lives. It is small wonder that, when the context of faith and divine inspiration are torn away from the events, your "accurate history" makes little sense. As Paul said, "The wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight."

Mona Williams
MWFrogDoc@aol.com
West Linn, OR

Dear FRONTLINE,

You have presented an outstanding view of the life of Christ. Although I do not agree with all of the viewpoints or accuracy of the material presented on the show I do find that it does bresent a clear historical background of the root of the Christian foundation. I find the informations to be accurate in most cases and unbiased. I commend you on a program that is presented with a unique a informative approach that leaves the question in the minds of it's viewers "who is this Jesus, Who is the Christ?". Only our faith will know the answer.

Rev. David Davis
dkdavis@zebra.net
Cordova, Alabama

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a cradle Catholic with a great deal of background in theology and modern scripture scholarship, I found this show fascinating. It is refreshing to see a secular broadcaster devote the hours it has to a specifically religious topic. I find it especially significant in the light of all the attention now paid to "new age" spirituality; it shows that a re-examination of our own Christian primary sources may tell us much about this man we call Jesus Christ. It seems ludicrous to be threatened by free and open scholarship: one can always disagree. In every other field of knowledge people seem open to new developments, but as soon as scholars present knowledge about Christ and his times in the light of new scholarship people become defensive and believe someone is trying to attack and undermine their faith. I believe that the more we know about the sociological, political, economic, and religious complexities of Jesus' day, the more we can see Jesus clearly. Thank God for my Jesuit undegraduate days!

Robyn Reso
rmreso@aol.com
houston, tx

Dear FRONTLINE,

This broadcast typifies what I have come to expect from PBS. I was familiar with many of the scholars that appeared on your program, and they were primarily debunkers of traditional Christianity. You provide a forum for these folk and present them as representing the consensus among scholars. Shame, shame. Much of modern Christian historical scholarship, especially from these "Jesus seminar" types, is arrogant and dishonest. They do not acknowledge the limits of their knowledge. Their understanding of biblical times is highly speculative, but they present it as established fact. For an alternative view, may I suggest: The Real Jesus by Luke Timothy Johnson and Jesus Under Fire, eds. Michael J. Wilkins & J. P. Moreland. Both books contain sound scholarship but are readable for the layperson.

And by the way, get balanced. Or get de-funded.

Bill Howard
bubbauno@flash.net
Buda, TX

Dear FRONTLINE,

You failed to address the most important issue regarding Jesus... Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light, no one comes to the Father except through me." Thanks for telling me about the history and culture of the Life of Jesus and uncoincidentally missing the biggest question that Jesus and the Scriptures ask-- Who was Jesus? A Liar? A lunatic? Or the Savior of all Mankind? That is the most important question any human will ever ask-- and woops-- looks like you missed it!

Tom & Alicia
thomast@home.com
Phoenix, Az

Dear FRONTLINE,

I greatly appreciate your coverage of the issue of examining who Jesus was/is. As some of the commenators mentioned, attempts by historians to find the "historical" Jesus often leads to dissapointment and confusion. For 20 years, I've seen "new" discoveries about Jesus, the gospels, the first Christians and other related topics come and go. Amidst all the theories and "discoveries" the "scholars" somehow always manage to miss the point that Jesus claimed to be God. That's why he was crucified. That why the apostles believed Him and eventually gave their lives for Him. No other reason would suffice for such a sacrifice. I've also never know anyone who was willing to read the Bible with an open heart (and mind) and not find Jesus as excactly who he claimed to be, Lord and Savior. Decades will pass, "new discoveries" will come and go as they have for two millenia and Jesus will still be saving the hopeless, helpless millions who call on Him to save their marriages, restore broken relationships and heal all manner of ills of the heart. "God uses the things of the weak to confound the strong and the things of the foolish to confound the wise. Thanks for your time and God Bless you. I respect your work. Rex Bauer

Rex Bauer
rbauer@npr.org
Washington, DC