The Bible (Miniseries) Gets Resurrected‎

After huge ratings and impressive DVD sales, “The Bible” miniseries that aired on the History Channel will get a second life:

The series producers, Mark Burnett and his actress wife, Roma Downey, are planning a follow-up project called “A.D.: Beyond the Bible,” and NBC has bought the rights to it…

“Beyond the Bible” will follow the story of the growth of Christianity from its beginnings…

I’m looking forward to the third installment when the Internet (also, strangely, looking just like President Obama) leads to Christianity’s downfall.

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • Gus Snarp

    I’m looking forward to Dusty’s take on this…

    • Tobias2772

      I would be willing to contribute to a Dusty mini-series on network television.

  • Rain

    “Beyond the Bible” will follow the story of the growth of Christianity from its beginnings…

    They should have a disclaimer: “Warning, the end was near ‘any day now soon’ right from its beginnings, so none of this was supposed to happen. I guess it’s all a bunch of hoo-haw.”

    • busterggi

      Nah, they’ll show the world ending sometime around the late 1st century which it totally did because the bible is inerrant.

  • Stev84

    Be prepared for lots of whitewashing and skimming over all the internal squabbles they had pretty much right away. Different sects who believed extremely different things. They couldn’t even agree on the nature of god and Jesus.

    The Protestant Reformation will then be dealt with, but given who is producing this Martin Luther will be portrayed as a nice guy and the Protestants are of course the One True Church.

    • LesterBallard

      I’m sure they’ll show how much Luther loved the Jews. Maybe read from On the Jews and Their Lies.

      • Feminerd

        I’m sure they’ll demonstrate Luther’s respect for women too. “If [women] become tired or even die, that does not matter. Let them die in childbirth – that is why they are there.”

        • LesterBallard

          Never came across that one; thanks. That should be Prick Perry’s and the Texas legislature’s motto.

    • Rev. Ouabache

      I’m personally looking forward to the section on Tertullian. Can’t wait to see how they whitewash his teachings.

  • Keyra

    Hopefully, fudie and atheistic misconceptions alike, would be resolved…sadly the majority of them can’t tell the difference between real Christianity (the universal relationship, not the religion, grace, compassion, restoration of broken lives, enlightenment), apart from misrepresented “Christianity” (extremism, bigotry, hypocrisy, corruption)

    • aaa

      Maybe you can start off by giving us a specific list of which christians are “Christians” and explicit details on how we can tell the difference and who gets to decide?

      • Tanner B James

        All “good” christians are innocent by association. The depth of denial that this commentator suffers from handicaps her ability to see the chronic implications of her persecution complex.

    • Tanner B James

      Are you Scottish?

      • WallofSleep

        At the very least, I can go along with the “No True Religion” sentiment.

    • Michael W Busch

      No True Christian, special case of No True Scotsman. Logical fallacy. Inadmissible.

    • Tanner B James

      Plausible Deniability?

    • Tanner B James

      I will give you some credit though. It does take a lot of courage to cover yourself in the blood of jesus and then take a swim in a pool of sharks.

    • Tanner B James

      Last one and then I’ll stop (maybe). Though both the words Naivety and Nativity look and sound similar and both imply some reference to innocence they are two radically different concepts.

    • indorri

      Y’know, I’m going to take a different tack. It would be swell if this were “true” Christianity, and I’m happy you advocate for it, but I think you’re incorrect that the extremism, etc. doesn’t have origins in Christianity as practised by early Christians and espoused in its scriptures.

    • Houndentenor

      No True Scotsman!

    • Sunny Day

      You know a TV show about a book full of fiction doesn’t make the fiction any more true don’t you?

    • WingedBeast

      You have, essentially, defined Christianity in a way that has nothing to do with whether or not one believes anything with regards to the figure called “Christ”.
      It may be useful when talking only among fellow Christians to ask “who really is following the words of Christ”. But, when talking to people who aren’t your personal followers, all you’re really doing is redefining the word for your Tribe so as to count only those you like to associate with.
      You should feel bad about that.

    • Rain

      Hopefully, fudie and atheistic misconceptions alike, would be resolved…sadly the majority of them can’t tell the difference between real Christianity (the universal relationship, not the religion, grace, compassion, restoration of broken lives, enlightenment), apart from misrepresented “Christianity” (extremism, bigotry, hypocrisy, corruption)

      Sure it takes all kinds. But it isn’t limited to Christianity. Not to mention the “relationship” is with a pretend-person. But hey whatever floats the boat.

  • Tanner B James

    One can only hope that “A.D.: Beyond the Bible” will shed light upon the gullibility of the European populaces during the 14th century, ‘cus you know what they say, “Nobody ever expected the…”

  • closetatheist

    This annoys me because of the large portion of the population who will believe literally everything they see on the History Channel or that everything that happens on CSI or something is plausible. Stuff like this just adds to the confusion and misinformation… after Samson episode aired I had this conversation with my cousin:

    Cousin: I never knew that Samson was a black dude!
    Me: That’s cause he wasn’t. He was a Philistine, not an African.
    Cousin: *utterly confused* But Samson was a big black guy on the show?
    Me: That’s just the actor they picked, they must have taken liberty with his character for some reason but the Philistines are originally thought to be Mycenaean. But, depending on how long they had been settled in the Levant they may have been sufficiently intermarried with the locals to be considered Canaanites.
    Cousin: *blank stare*
    Me: They were white.
    Cousin: *determined to prove me wrong* But then why would they have a black guy on the show!?
    Me: *blank stare*

    • Anat

      Samson supposedly was from the tribe of Dan, though he did marry a Philistine. However he was born to a previously infertile couple after the woman had an encounter with an angel. Or so she claimed. The race (or skin color) of the angel is not described. For all we know, the ‘angel’ may have been black.

      • closetatheist

        Very true, he was supposedly from the tribe of Dan. Yet, knowing that the land occupied by the tribe during this era was far north of the Philistine settlement – and the familiarity Samson had with the Philistine area and people has lead some to speculate that he was in fact a Philistine who was claimed by the Israelites as a hero sometime later…Supernatural or spectacular theories aside, he was most probably of Mycenaean or Canaanite ancestry.

  • rg57

    I saw the miniseries, and I’m not surprised that it didn’t actually cover the subject that it claimed to cover, but I am disappointed because I was actually hoping to learn about those parts of the Bible that aren’t widely-known, or aren’t as flattering (in some eyes) as what made it to the screen.

    How can a series on the Bible simply leave out the books of Job and Jonah, for example? Beyond that, most of the New Testament, including Revelation, seemed to be crammed into the last few minutes like an afterthought. I was dismayed that so much time was wasted on the Gospels and Acts that most viewers would likely be familiar with.

    I think they need to go back and finish the first job they started, before playing around with “history”. A good history of Christianity already exists: 2009′s BBC miniseries “A History of Christianity”.

  • Robster

    What they need to do is come up with a new and improved bible, using the morality of today rather than the current version’s rather out-dated bronze age morality. They could have the baby jesus do more modern miracles, like getting a phone provider that offers good service or something useful. Rather than plain old walking on water, he could say walk the surf waves without a board or over a waterfall like Bear Grills. Using the Magic golden arches, baby jesus could feed more than five thousand and with more than red wine and crackers or loaves and fishes. A Big Mac would be a whole lot more inviting.

  • duke_of_omnium

    The Bible Part II: The Wrath of Christ

    • aaa


  • Nox

    Probably just gonna be Acts:The Movie. The last f*cking thing they would want is for christians to have any knowledge of the actual history of the church.

  • Stev84

    Ok, I saw another description and apparently it doesn’t go into the middle ages, but focuses on how the poor Christians are oppressed by the evil Romans. Never mind that the Roman Empire was pretty tolerant about other religions as long as they acknowledged the Roman state and its civic/state religion. Which the Christians refused to do. And then later overstated the persecution they received.

    Never mind that once the Christians came to power, they weren’t any different, but brutally suppressed all pagan religions, destroyed temples, burned books, etc. That was a process that took two or three centuries, but by the time of Justinian apostasy was punished by death.

  • JA

    Would love to see a comparable miniseries about Egyptian or Sumerian mythology, but it’d never fly, since it would be beyond most people.