Episode 3 of NBC's AD: The Bible Continues was essentially a collapsed version of the first 3 chapters of Acts. What stuck out most was the way that the writers and producers structured the episode. The build up was slow and deliberate, displaying the interpretive freedom that has effectively become one of the series' defining characteristics. It took a while to get to the content of Acts, and the episode ultimately climaxed with 1) the empowerment of the disciples by means of the Holy Spirit's decent through tongue of fire (Acts 2) and 2) Peter's miraculous healing of the cripple near the Temple (Acts 3). To intensify the climax, Peter's two sermons recounted in Acts 2 and 3 were amalgamated into one sermon boldly proclaimed in front of Caiaphas, who stood of the Temple entrance. Peter and John are then beaten and thrown in jail.If I could chose one word to describe the permeating theme of the episode it would be "uncertainty." The disciples were uncertain about what Jerusalem held for them. They knew the powder-keg to which they were returning, and they were uncertain as to what this Holy Spirit thing would mean for them. The only thing about which they were certain was that Jesus told them to go back. The Romans were uncertain of what this Jesus cult would bring next, and the Jewish leadership was uncertain as to what the variable of Pentecost would add to an already volatile situation. In a word, the buildup to the episode's climax was driven by these paralleled streams of uncertainty.
I like the element of uncertainty that has been developed over the first few episodes, even though it is a very clear example of interpretive freedom exercised by the writers and producers. It has effectively added flesh and bones to the characters of the Bible. What were the emotions of the disciples after the ascension? What kind of questions did they have as they pondered and waited for this promised Holy Spirit? They were never completely certain of things, were they? Nevertheless, in this episode I would have liked to see a little more emphasis upon the upper room event during Pentecost. According to Acts, this was the moment when the disciples realized a few things about the resurrection event (see Peter's sermon in ch. 2). It really was a watershed moment for the early Church, and so it is really difficult to overstate it importance. It deserves it time in the sun. In other words, the unfolding of the episode's climax felt rushed. According to Acts, this moment was about realization and empowerment. It was this moment that gave Peter and Co. the boldness to defy the Jerusalem leadership and proclaim that this Jesus cult was, perhaps, more alive and vibrant than ever. Indeed, there is a telling scene at the very end of the episode where Peter glares at Caiaphas as if to say, "You have no idea what is coming." This nicely visualized the newly endowed boldness supernaturally given to Peter. Yet all of it still left something to be desired.
Why did they rush the Pentecost event and Peter's subsequent healing of the cripple? It appears that the writers and producers has chosen to make the Church's rise in the midst of political turmoil to be a main story line, if not the main story line, for the miniseries, at least for the time being. But this is not to say that such a historical emphasis is misguided or wrong. No. It is correct...part of the miracle of the early Church was its ability to navigate the turbulent socio-political waters that were 1st Century Palestine. But as I reflect, I am struck with a question that I believe deserves asking. Is this point of emphasis in the miniseries more about creating a story line that is entertaining to a television audience than recounting the advancements of the early Church? I don't know. I realize that there is something quasi-political about the spread of the early Church, not to mention genuinely suspenseful about Acts. Time will tell if this artistic emphasis will compromise the major point communicated in Acts--the global spread of God's kingdom through the empowered and bold apostles (verses the deteriorating political climate of Palestine in the 1st Century).
There was a very telling scene in this episode, and it occurred between Peter and his daughter. Peter's daughter was pressing him, telling him that he had changed. She recounted how he used to know exactly what he wanted and how he went after it. In a word, her father displayed a history of being driven. She of course was contrasting this to his current state of confusion and anxiety. Peter essentially responded, "I knew that I wanted to fish. Fish meant money, and money meant food and clothes. Life was simple." To put it another way, Peter was declaring that life was predictable, but now Jesus and the implications of his ministry--and Peter realized that he could not ignore this man--had introduced a variable in his life that was difficult to anticipate. All he knew what that Christ demanded his allegiance, his full allegiance.
Such is the gospel. It demands our allegiance, our full allegiance. And when we offer it, we must accept the fact that there will be times when we must accept a certain level of uncertainty. Where we will go? What will it demand of us? These are the questions that the apostles first lived out, setting an example of what it means to be a follower of Christ. So yes, there will be uncertainty...there has always been uncertainty. However, it is a tamed uncertainty, grounded in the absolute certainty that Christ is alive and empowers his people to proclaim the gospel boldly.
No comments:
Post a Comment