I have read the comments left by persons unhappy with the program and Simcha Jacobovici. What they have in common are: unhappy atheists looking for evidence to disprove the Jewish Bible; unhappy anti-Jews who are looking for evidence to disprove the Jewish Bible; and unhappy Christians who are looking for evidence to support the gospels. Simcha Jacobovici is a secular archaeologist first and a Jew second. Some of the people who leave negative comments admit to not watching his programs out of disgust. If you watch all the episodes from season 1-3, you will find that he does in fact find evidence that does NOT support the Biblical accounts or orthodox Judaism. The reasons given that he is biased also stem from the fact that he is Jewish and reports archaeological evidence that supports the Jewish view of history but not the Christian view of history. This is related to those who complain that he does not cover the "contrary opinions" or "other side" of issues. Simcha Jacobovici does do investigations into the Christian view of history, but he does NOT find archaeological evidence to support the Christian Bible stories. If you have watched all the episodes seasons 1- 3, he does investigate Christian contentions, but he finds evidence that refutes the Christian biblical accounts and when he find conflicting, contradictory evidence, the Christian guardians or these artifacts refuse him interviews or access to the artifacts. A brief list of his Christian investigation episodes in seasons 1 and 2 is helpful: "Jesus: the Early Years"; "John the Baptist"; "Crucifixion"; "The Search for St. Peter"; "Miracle Workers of Galilee";"What Happened to the JC Bunch" 1-3; and "The Beloved Disciple". Christians are offended when he does not find archaeological evidence to support the gospels. Instead, he finds evidence that Jesus lived and died a Jew, and his 1st century followers, lead by his brother James, continued to live as Jews. Christianity as we know it was not founded by Jesus, Peter, James, or any of the apostles. Christianity as we know it was founded by Paul who did not know Jesus but went to the Greaco-Romans and borrowed from their pagan beliefs and the growing Jewish presence in Rome to convert peoples who already believed in divine incarnations and dying savior cults to create a new religion. Christians do not like it when he finds archaeological evidence of this. It is prejudice in favor of Christianity where the viewer expects validation of the gospels. But, he does not find evidence to support the gospels but evidence to refute them. Here is the crux of the negative comments: atheists who are displeased that he does not refute the Jewish view of history and Christians who are upset that he finds evidence to refute the gospels. If the archaeological evidence supports the Jewish view of history, then perhaps it is time to reject your atheistic, anti-Jewish, pro-Christian biases and accept that the archeology he finds supports Judaism. This is a common problem in science vs. religion: people with religious biases reject science that does not support their religion. The same was encountered by Darwin from the publication of "The Origin of Species" to this day: schools that insist that students are presented lessons in "creationism"/"intelligent design" and fundamentalists that refute the archaeological record. It is time to get over it and watch "The Naked Archaeologist" with an open mind. Simcha Jacobovici is not on a mission to promote Judaism: he just does not find archaeological evidence to refute it or prove the contentions of the gospels. I myself have been upset by some of his programs. "Who Wrote the Bible" skips over the secular and religious investigation of the writing styles, word choices, and passages inconsistent with context that suggest that there were 4 sources for the Jewish Bible. Instead, he contends that Moses alone wrote the Torah. I wanted to ask him how Moses managed to write of his own death and burial while he still lived. So, Simcha Jacobovici is not always truly objective. But, for me, when he questions the validity of the historical time line of Joshua, he redeems himself. Like all humans, he is subject to some mistakes in his science. But, you can not reject his work as a whole because he does not validate your atheistic, anti- Jewish, and Christian biases. Archaeology is a science and not a religious pursuit. In all, Jacobovici is a secular scientist who happens to be Jewish. This is not sufficient to dismiss him or his work.
4 out of 7 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink