I watched the first three episodes and I find them very deceiving, especially if you are not familiar with the Word. For those who struggle reading, meditating and interpreting the Bible these images and depictions are what they would consider true even if the viewers are given a warning before each episode as to the faithfulness to the Bible narrative. If this is someone first exposure to God and His Word or maybe some young believer’s first exposure to King David’s life before he or she meets King David in the Scriptures it may cause a disharmony of what they saw and what they may read in the word with the first exposure taking precedence over the latter. Unfortunately, when we try to entertain rather than disciple with the Word ( 2 Tim 3:16-17 no mention of entertainment) we do not head what Scripture warns us not to do, Deut 4:2, 32, Prov 30:6 and Rev 22:18. If we want to be approved of God we must be diligent in handling His Word accurately and faithfully and not lead to the ruin those who learn by what they see. It is a responsibility we should take very seriously because God will be our judge.
Agree with your comments and appreciate them, but to be fair to the producer they do show a warning at the beginning of each episode stating that they have taken some artistic license with the facts. I think that leaves it up to the integrity of the viewer to discern what those liberties are.
Phil 1:18 - whatever their motives may be if they preach Christ they preach Christ.
Could you give specific examples? It sounds like you might be of the opinion that they shouldn't take any artistic license at all, which isn't particularly helpful for those of us who think there's an acceptable and unacceptable type of artistic license when it comes to dramatizing Biblical events.
Laura, when we are first introduced to David in 1 Samuel 16:11 and following there is no mention of his mother or that he was an illegitimate son. He was just the youngest son of seven. "He was ruddy, with beautiful eyes and a handsome appearance." 1 Samuel 16:12 (NASB). Though King David was a man after God's own heart he had his failings as we all do. But, to say he was a bastard son of Jesse is beyond artistic license, it is slanderous to the character of David, who had enough imperfections without adding one that is not true. Don't you think that through all the genealogies of Jesus given in the Gospels that this would have been mentioned along with Tamar, Rahab and Bathsheba (Matt 1:1-17)? One of the great things about the Bible is that their dirty laundry is not hidden, these are real, unperfect people God used.
His battle with Goliath was not even a close call but the screen writers have David hit by one of the many spears of Goliath that are not mentioned in the Bible while battling Goliath. The battle scene with David and Goliath is not at all what is given to us in the Bible. Is this not more than artistic license?
We must be cautious with what we let into our lives with entertainment. The oldest question ever used is, " Indeed, has God said," Genesis 3:1 (NASB)
Laura, I forgot to tell you, I'm not a fan of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunnie and the eggs but I do like Cadbury eggs.
RudyB
A review of the actual show would be appreciated. The trailer reveals a fair amount of freedom from the biblical text. Of course this must happen. But it would be nice to have someone with some background review it for us.
We watched the first episode and will continue to but - it does deviate a fair amount from Scripture. Interesting take on David - kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural.
So far the biggest objection is that David presents himself as a "bastard child" longing for his deceased mother. He is estranged from his father Jesse because of this and calls himself an outcast from his father.
It is true that one could read that into the verse Ps 51:5 about "in sin my mother conceived me..." but that is not the conservative Christian normative take on it - being this is David anguishing over the problem of Original Sin. Again kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural...
We probably need to see this series and Dallas Jenkin's The Chosen as more of a creative drama that is intended to draw viewers because of the controversy over some of its interpretations. Although many of us get concerned that people are not seeing the true Gospel, even perhaps for their first exposure, it is drawing people to Christ and as He Himself said "If he is not against us, then he is for us..."
That is my prayer that these dramatic, and perhaps less accurate renditions, at least draw people to Christ and make them hunger for Him and the real Truth. Phil 1:18
Yes, that was an interesting take on David’s mother. But biblically, we never hear anything about David’s mother, so that artistic license could, or could not be correct. But it does make sense when you see how Jesse gathers his older sons around him when Samuel comes, and seems to totally forget about David.
Additionally, there is quite a bit of violence in the first two episodes that we watched; enough to totally scare and turn off my 12yod.
I think the book of Ruth and 1 Chron 10 make pretty clear that Jesse is the father of David and as important as lineage was to them this whole artistic license doesn't really ring true, but again kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural...
It is a tad violent in spots and a fair warning on your part. Blessings!
It sounds like they're saying the show implies that Jesse was the father, but David's mother wasn't Jesse's wife. (Dead mother and all that.) But I could be misinterpreting that.
This being in some cases wildly extra-Biblical is an evolving story - in the third episode it is revealed that David is the son of a non-Hebrew woman and Jesse - David was born out of wedlock.
It turns out that according to Jewish Midrashic tradition where it portrays him as an outcast in his own family. This legend is found in later rabbinic sources, particularly in Midrash Shmuel.
According to this tradition, David’s father, Jesse (Yishai), was a righteous man and a descendant of Ruth and Boaz. However, as he grew older, he began to doubt whether his ancestry was fully legitimate under Jewish law. The concern was that as a descendant of Ruth the Moabite, he might not be considered a true Israelite, since there was debate about whether Moabite converts were allowed in the Jewish community.
Jesse’s Plan
To resolve this concern, Jesse decided to separate from his wife, Nitzevet bat Adael, to avoid any potential "illegitimate" offspring. However, years later, he still desired more children but was unsure if he could do so in a way that aligned with his strict interpretation of Jewish law. He came up with a plan inspired by the biblical story of Rachel and Leah: he would be with his wife's maidservant instead, allowing him to father a child without involving Nitzevet.
Nitzevet’s Secret
Nitzevet, heartbroken by Jesse’s decision, devised a plan with her maidservant. Similar to Leah’s deception in Genesis (when she was substituted for Rachel on her wedding night), Nitzevet took the place of her maidservant and secretly reunited with Jesse without his knowledge. As a result, she conceived David.
David’s Rejection
Because Jesse did not know the truth, he assumed that Nitzevet had been unfaithful and that David was born from an illegitimate affair. Rather than exposing her to public shame (which could have led to severe consequences under ancient law), Jesse allowed David to be born and raised in his household but treated him as an outcast. His older brothers also believed this falsehood and looked down on him, treating him as a lowly servant or shepherd.
This context is used to explain verses like Psalm 69:8, where David says:
"I have become a stranger to my brothers, and an alien to my mother’s children."
But remember that Paul in Titus 1:14, warns against paying attention to "Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." Some interpret this as a critique of non-biblical traditions or speculative interpretations that were developing in Jewish thought at the time. We get the fallacious fable of Adam's "first wife" Lilith from this same rabbinic literature/tradition which by all accounts is heresy. So there are sources for this interpretation in the House of David, but not what would be considered legitimate.
I watched the first three episodes and I find them very deceiving, especially if you are not familiar with the Word. For those who struggle reading, meditating and interpreting the Bible these images and depictions are what they would consider true even if the viewers are given a warning before each episode as to the faithfulness to the Bible narrative. If this is someone first exposure to God and His Word or maybe some young believer’s first exposure to King David’s life before he or she meets King David in the Scriptures it may cause a disharmony of what they saw and what they may read in the word with the first exposure taking precedence over the latter. Unfortunately, when we try to entertain rather than disciple with the Word ( 2 Tim 3:16-17 no mention of entertainment) we do not head what Scripture warns us not to do, Deut 4:2, 32, Prov 30:6 and Rev 22:18. If we want to be approved of God we must be diligent in handling His Word accurately and faithfully and not lead to the ruin those who learn by what they see. It is a responsibility we should take very seriously because God will be our judge.
Agree with your comments and appreciate them, but to be fair to the producer they do show a warning at the beginning of each episode stating that they have taken some artistic license with the facts. I think that leaves it up to the integrity of the viewer to discern what those liberties are.
Phil 1:18 - whatever their motives may be if they preach Christ they preach Christ.
Could you give specific examples? It sounds like you might be of the opinion that they shouldn't take any artistic license at all, which isn't particularly helpful for those of us who think there's an acceptable and unacceptable type of artistic license when it comes to dramatizing Biblical events.
Laura, when we are first introduced to David in 1 Samuel 16:11 and following there is no mention of his mother or that he was an illegitimate son. He was just the youngest son of seven. "He was ruddy, with beautiful eyes and a handsome appearance." 1 Samuel 16:12 (NASB). Though King David was a man after God's own heart he had his failings as we all do. But, to say he was a bastard son of Jesse is beyond artistic license, it is slanderous to the character of David, who had enough imperfections without adding one that is not true. Don't you think that through all the genealogies of Jesus given in the Gospels that this would have been mentioned along with Tamar, Rahab and Bathsheba (Matt 1:1-17)? One of the great things about the Bible is that their dirty laundry is not hidden, these are real, unperfect people God used.
His battle with Goliath was not even a close call but the screen writers have David hit by one of the many spears of Goliath that are not mentioned in the Bible while battling Goliath. The battle scene with David and Goliath is not at all what is given to us in the Bible. Is this not more than artistic license?
We must be cautious with what we let into our lives with entertainment. The oldest question ever used is, " Indeed, has God said," Genesis 3:1 (NASB)
Thanks, that helps me make a more informed decision.
Laura, I forgot to tell you, I'm not a fan of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunnie and the eggs but I do like Cadbury eggs.
A review of the actual show would be appreciated. The trailer reveals a fair amount of freedom from the biblical text. Of course this must happen. But it would be nice to have someone with some background review it for us.
We watched the first episode and will continue to but - it does deviate a fair amount from Scripture. Interesting take on David - kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural.
So far the biggest objection is that David presents himself as a "bastard child" longing for his deceased mother. He is estranged from his father Jesse because of this and calls himself an outcast from his father.
It is true that one could read that into the verse Ps 51:5 about "in sin my mother conceived me..." but that is not the conservative Christian normative take on it - being this is David anguishing over the problem of Original Sin. Again kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural...
We probably need to see this series and Dallas Jenkin's The Chosen as more of a creative drama that is intended to draw viewers because of the controversy over some of its interpretations. Although many of us get concerned that people are not seeing the true Gospel, even perhaps for their first exposure, it is drawing people to Christ and as He Himself said "If he is not against us, then he is for us..."
That is my prayer that these dramatic, and perhaps less accurate renditions, at least draw people to Christ and make them hunger for Him and the real Truth. Phil 1:18
Thank you for your review, very helpful.
Yes, that was an interesting take on David’s mother. But biblically, we never hear anything about David’s mother, so that artistic license could, or could not be correct. But it does make sense when you see how Jesse gathers his older sons around him when Samuel comes, and seems to totally forget about David.
Additionally, there is quite a bit of violence in the first two episodes that we watched; enough to totally scare and turn off my 12yod.
Appreciate your comments.
I think the book of Ruth and 1 Chron 10 make pretty clear that Jesse is the father of David and as important as lineage was to them this whole artistic license doesn't really ring true, but again kinda of fun to watch it play out even if not completely Scriptural...
It is a tad violent in spots and a fair warning on your part. Blessings!
It sounds like they're saying the show implies that Jesse was the father, but David's mother wasn't Jesse's wife. (Dead mother and all that.) But I could be misinterpreting that.
This being in some cases wildly extra-Biblical is an evolving story - in the third episode it is revealed that David is the son of a non-Hebrew woman and Jesse - David was born out of wedlock.
It turns out that according to Jewish Midrashic tradition where it portrays him as an outcast in his own family. This legend is found in later rabbinic sources, particularly in Midrash Shmuel.
According to this tradition, David’s father, Jesse (Yishai), was a righteous man and a descendant of Ruth and Boaz. However, as he grew older, he began to doubt whether his ancestry was fully legitimate under Jewish law. The concern was that as a descendant of Ruth the Moabite, he might not be considered a true Israelite, since there was debate about whether Moabite converts were allowed in the Jewish community.
Jesse’s Plan
To resolve this concern, Jesse decided to separate from his wife, Nitzevet bat Adael, to avoid any potential "illegitimate" offspring. However, years later, he still desired more children but was unsure if he could do so in a way that aligned with his strict interpretation of Jewish law. He came up with a plan inspired by the biblical story of Rachel and Leah: he would be with his wife's maidservant instead, allowing him to father a child without involving Nitzevet.
Nitzevet’s Secret
Nitzevet, heartbroken by Jesse’s decision, devised a plan with her maidservant. Similar to Leah’s deception in Genesis (when she was substituted for Rachel on her wedding night), Nitzevet took the place of her maidservant and secretly reunited with Jesse without his knowledge. As a result, she conceived David.
David’s Rejection
Because Jesse did not know the truth, he assumed that Nitzevet had been unfaithful and that David was born from an illegitimate affair. Rather than exposing her to public shame (which could have led to severe consequences under ancient law), Jesse allowed David to be born and raised in his household but treated him as an outcast. His older brothers also believed this falsehood and looked down on him, treating him as a lowly servant or shepherd.
This context is used to explain verses like Psalm 69:8, where David says:
"I have become a stranger to my brothers, and an alien to my mother’s children."
But remember that Paul in Titus 1:14, warns against paying attention to "Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." Some interpret this as a critique of non-biblical traditions or speculative interpretations that were developing in Jewish thought at the time. We get the fallacious fable of Adam's "first wife" Lilith from this same rabbinic literature/tradition which by all accounts is heresy. So there are sources for this interpretation in the House of David, but not what would be considered legitimate.