For visual storytelling of the Bible, the Gospel is likely most precisely portrayed through a 1979 film simply title Jesus (advanced through The Jesus Film Project).
However, most artists wish to expand on the relatively straightforward story, and many people wish to consume it, which is how The Chosen has become a gigantic and popular project.
If you investigate online without watching it, you’ll see the same general attitude:
- “There are lots of good things in it…”
- “…though there have been some debatable aspects like affiliation with a Mormon production company…”
- “…but overall it’s a worthwhile watch” or “…and it’s a good idea to be careful as you watch it”.
However, they typically only provide a few examples of what they’re talking about.
In light of that, this is an attempt to visit The Chosen, scene by scene, in the hopes of elucidating and categorizing its elements:
- LEGIT – things that are excellent art, and capitalize the truths of Scripture
- IFFY – things connected to something extra-biblical or debatable (e.g., church tradition, Mormonism, etc.)
- WRONG – things taken totally wrongly from what reality depicts (e.g., Hebrew culture vs. the depicted American culture)
- CREATIVE – liberties that are probably fine and typically taken because of a void in the original narrative (e.g., an Apostle’s extended family)
The Chosen emphasizes that it’s a story revolving around the facts of Scripture and not an exhaustive depiction of the facts:
- Christians should give The Chosen the grace they give to things like SuperBook or The Greatest Adventure: Stories from the Bible, where creative liberty is taken for the purpose of storytelling.
- Of course, with that said, false doctrines arise when we add or remove from the basic truths presented in Scripture, which God will judge (Revelation 22:18-19).
- However, any human culture will inevitably permute a story if they value it.
- Therefore, the purpose here is to educate on the discrepancies without judgment, and you can come to your own conclusion.
Further, like exploring Bible translations, there can be quite a bit of value in seeing the truths observed by others who sincerely desire to see it as well.
Pilot – “The Shepherd”
0:00-2:05 – shepherd named Simon at well
- LEGIT – good symbolism of an unblemished lamb by using an unusually bright white lamb (e.g., John 1:29)
- LEGIT – extra points for the shepherd having a limp on the leg, which alludes to Genesis 3:15‘s “heel”
- LEGIT – decent symbolism of depicting Christ’s “passion” (carrying and then dying on the cross) using a tired shepherd who is limping
- LEGIT – symbolically naming the character “Simon” refers to the ancient meaning of “obedient” or “faithful”
- IFFY – a title card says “the prophets of Israel had been silent for 400 years”, but Jews couldn’t really agree on what was Scripture at the time
2:05-2:40 – priest reading Micah
- LEGIT – uses English Standard Version (ESV), which is a good English-language Bible translation hybrid of readability (idea-for-idea) and accuracy (word-for-word)
- WRONG – the reading would have been from a local rabbi, and not a priest
- WRONG – the priest reads Micah 5:2-3a, then jumps to 5:5, which would probably get him fired as a rabbi or worse
2:40-5:13 – Pharisee rejecting the lamb
- LEGIT – the attitude about the Messiah was absolutely that He’d be a strong military leader
- LEGIT – good symbolism about a Jewish leader rejecting “the Lamb”
- WRONG – the shepherd has a very forward approach with the priest, and Jewish people were forced to know their place in the social hierarchy
- WRONG – the Pharisees were the religious leadership, so the priest would have been a little more politely condescending with rejecting his lamb than outright mean (though it may happen if there was a precedent that wasn’t shown in the story)
- WRONG – Hebrew people were more communal than Americans, which means his fellow shepherds would be less harsh about leaving him alone (though it could be justified if he had a precedent of being slow)
- CREATIVE – it’s likely someone could be autistic enough in that time to be obsessive about the Messiah, but they’d never be so oblivious by that age to social cues that they’d offend a priest
5:13-6:30 – Simon rejected from synagogue
- LEGIT – excellent visual poetry depicting the “rabble” being rejected from religious practice, a common theme throughout the Gospels
- LEGIT – symbolic blood being wiped away represents a similar image of the Messiah’s blood being “cleaned” from the altar (and therefore rejecting Him as alluded to in Hebrews 6:1-6)
- IFFY – priest reading Isaiah 35:4, but skips part of the verse
- IFFY – synagogue was on Sabbath (i.e., Saturday), and Hebrews did not work, which includes bringing a lamb into town
- WRONG – priest reads Isaiah 35:4, then bounces over to Isaiah 9 (see Pilot 2:05-2:40)
6:30-7:29 – Simon meets Joseph and Mary
- LEGIT – Nazareth was the Detroit, MI or Compton, CA of its day
- CREATIVE – it wasn’t implied that someone who came from Nazareth would be publicly shamed simply for coming from that town, and we don’t know whether John 1:46‘s reference to the saying was Nathanael’s opinion or a common saying
7:29-8:16 – rabbi reading Isaiah
- LEGIT – rabbi reading Isaiah 35:3-6a with only one minor word out of place
8:16-11:15 – shepherds hanging out
- IFFY – it’s likely the shepherds would be severely harsh if a Pharisee rejected their sheep, but the entire situation is debatable to be even possible
- CREATIVE – shepherds would probably have the sophistication of construction workers, though likely would be less jerks only due to the required patience for doing the job
- CREATIVE – given the total hypocrisy of the Pharisees, it’s only natural the underclass would have jokes at their expense (bonus points for it being a Jewish money joke)
11:15-18:25 – shepherds see an angel and visit Jesus
- LEGIT – Mary would have likely been very young, probably a teenager, with Joseph being significantly older
- LEGIT – shepherd directly quotes Isaiah 9:6-7, and illiterate Hebrews would have definitely been better at memorizing their Tanakh than most modern people
- IFFY – Simon running is a visual imagery of Isaiah 35:6, though it’s not reasonable to assume Jesus performed miracles as early as birth
- IFFY – poetic depiction of narrating Isaiah 7:14 with a baby crying at the end, though it’s merging the Matthew account into the mainstream Luke account to do this
- IFFY – ancient and medieval tradition says that Mary, as the new Eve, would not have experienced the pain of childbirth connected to the curse of Genesis 3:16
- IFFY – the angel’s statement was “for unto you is born this day…”, meaning the shepherds would have been running to a baby that would have already been born
- IFFY – the shepherds would have been so awestruck in reverence, they would likely have not wanted to even touch baby Jesus (similar to the standard Hebrew and pagan sanctification practices of the time)
- IFFY – The name Jesus would have been Yeshua, a common shift from Joshua, and was a common name for the time, though most of the Christian church gets this wrong
- WRONG – the shepherds would have audibly heard an angel, and there’d be an angelic chorus with him (Luke 2:8-15)
18:25-18:48 – Pharisee confronts Simon
- IFFY – it’d be weird to have a Pharisee present that late at night in the marketplace, but it’s trying to aim for a poetic close to the earlier scene
- WRONG – not even the disciples understood what Jesus was going to do (i.e., sacrifice), so it’s not reasonable to assume a shepherd would have come to the conclusion from seeing a baby, no matter how awesome that baby was (Luke 18:31-34)
S1E1 – “I Have Called You by Name”
0:00-0:28 – title card
- LEGIT – props for owning that this entire thing is a story, and to encourage people to read the Bible themselves
- IFFY – Mary Magadalene was implied to suffer from demonic oppression since childhood
0:28-2:06 – flashback of child afraid with parent
- LEGIT – direct reference to Isaiah 43:1
2:06-3:16 – Mary Magdalene witnessing the consequences of a demonic episode
- CREATIVE – there is literally nothing in the Bible about Mary Magdalene except Luke 8:2 and her presence in the later “passion narratives” (when Jesus was sentenced and killed on the cross), so everything is essentially made-up
- IFFY – the implication is that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, which is Christian tradition, and has been taken different ways (e.g., defying patriarchal norms), and in this situation is taken as a consequence of being a victim of both demons and being raped by a Roman soldier
3:16-4:16 – opening credits
4:16-6:26 – Nicodemus stopped by praetor Quintus
- LEGIT – there was quite a bit of friction between the Roman leadership (who emphasized that Caesar was a god) and Jewish religious leadership (who emphasized that any god was below God)
- IFFY – Nicodemus would not have been so forward with the a Roman praetor by saying “and I serve only God”
- CREATIVE – it’s entirely reasonable to assume there’d be some “quid pro quo” with the Jewish leadership to keep the people at peace with Rome
6:26-8:25 – Matthew starts his workday as a tax collector
- LEGIT – tax collectors at the time were a combination of how we see IRS agents and lawyers combined
- IFFY – even a fastidious tax collector of the time wouldn’t retch from stepping in manure after seeing rats
- WRONG – given the scarcity of water in the area, there’d be a lot more dust and dirt over pretty much everything
- WRONG – while
- CREATIVE – we don’t know much about Matthew/Levi except that he was a tax collector at a booth when Jesus called him (Matthew 9:9) and that he was one of the twelve Apostles (Matthew 10:3)
8:25-10:07 – Nicodemus teaching publicly
- LEGIT – teachers of the time would sit, while listeners would often stand
- LEGIT – the idea of things going into a person defiling them comes from the Hebrew tradition of Netilat Yadayim, a tradition based on the Talmud derived from Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 that Jesus spoke against in Mark 7:14-23
- LEGIT – the Hebrew leaders were obsessive about honoring Shabbat, with many commentaries in the Talmud with many rules in Hebrew society to that end
- CREATIVE – we don’t know much about Nicodemus except that he was a Hebrew teacher of some sort (John 3:1-21), academically resisted his colleagues on prosecuting Jesus (John 7:45-52), and assisted Joseph of Arimathea to prepare the customary spices for preparing Jesus’ burial (John 19:38-40)
10:07-12:56 – Nicodemus visits rabbi, pulled away to deal with demoniac
- LEGIT – the rabbis had become a spiritual leadership after the destruction of Solomon’s Temple, and when the Second Temple was built (aka “Herod’s Temple”), the Temple leadership and rabbis were constantly wrestling with friction around power dynamics
- IFFY – the Red Quarter doesn’t properly exist within Israel, but may have some symbolic meaning
- CREATIVE – it’s absurdly unlikely that Nicodemus tried to exorcise Mary Magdalene
12:56-15:31 – Matthew arrives at the market
- WRONG – a beggar wouldn’t assume someone that everyone hates is the Messiah
- WRONG – tax collectors were despised, but they were also given the authority of the Roman Empire, so they wouldn’t be publicly derided or spat on
15:31-17:49 – Nicodemus arrives at building where demoniac resides
- LEGIT – Roman soldiers wouldn’t have cared what Jews did
- WRONG – the Roman Empire was ruthless, so nobody would ever be bold enough to graffiti “Messiah will destroy the Romans” on a wall
- WRONG – Nicodemus would know his place, and would never have asserted his boundaries so harshly with a Roman soldier
17:49- –
- LEGIT – we know quite a bit about Simon’s personality, especially in his boldness and lack of restraint
- LEGIT – Peter and Andrew were both fishermen, and both brothers to each other
- CREATIVE – it’s definitely possible Simon was engaged in fistfights, but nothing indicated in Scripture or church tradition