“The Chosen” and the Sufficiency of Scripture - by TRAVIS KERNS

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------

Mr. Kerns disappoints us. There's a scholarly veneer to his presentation, but that quickly develops cracks as he wanders farther and farther into seeming irrationality. By the end of his article he's making wild claims about this TV show that are simply not justified by the things he presents.

In addition, he repeatedly asserts that the sufficiency of Scripture does not allow for the possibility for other information. It's a truly odd claim not found in the Bible nor practiced by any Christian including himself.

We had hoped to discover what, if any, flaws in this TV show, with analyses of the show's perspective and doctrine. We do not find that, unfortunately.

We seriously doubt Mr. Kerns has ever seen the show.

We should note that we are not here to defend The Chosen. We also have never seen it. We are here to examine Mr. Kerns' claims.

-----------------

(...)

Having surveyed, albeit briefly, various scholars concerning the biblical text in Exodus 20:4–6 and finding the series to be biblically lacking, we turn now to a theological critique of The Chosen. (Mr. Kerns will never discuss the theology of the TV show.)

First, a discussion of the sufficiency of Scripture as God’s revelation and the relationship of sufficiency to The Chosen, will be helpful. Second, a discussion concerning the addition of words not attributed to Jesus in the New Testament and/or words deleted from the mouth of Jesus as found in the New Testament will be instructive.

First, how does the sufficiency of Scripture relate to The Chosen“? The sufficiency of Scripture, as historically understood in Evangelical Protestantism, means the Bible is sufficient for all areas of Christian faith and practice. John Frame defines the sufficiency of Scripture by writing, “Scripture contains all the divine words needed for any aspect of human life.”2 Wayne Grudem’s definition is similar. He notes, “[T]he sufficiency of Scripture means that Scripture contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly.”3

Indeed, all matters pertaining to salvation and Christian obedience are either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the inerrant and infallible Word of our sovereign God. 

(...)

If, as 2 Timothy 3:16–17 instructs, God’s Word indeed supplies all that is needed for every good work, then nothing more, in whatever form that may come, is needed. (Whoa. Interesting Mr. Kerns does not quote the verses. Let's do his work for him: 

2Ti. 3:16-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

First and most obviously, this passage does not tell us the Scriptures are "all that is needed." We can read it for ourselves. Scripture is "profitable," for it helps us to be complete [ready now, prepared to function] and equipped [fitted because all the parts work together]. These two Greek words we linked to, artios and exartizó, are closely related. Paul is very nearly repeating himself using the two words as he tells Timothy the Bible provides the various things to make him ready to go, as well as having the stuff all lined up to do the job.

Second, "all we need" does not equal "all there is." Being fully equipped does not speak to whether or not there is something more. One can possess every tool for the job, but that does not exclude the existence of other tools. Otherwise we would not need sermons, the gathering of the saints, Bible commentaries, or even Mr. Kerns' article.

Paul's statement about the usefulness of Scripture has nothing to do with other possible things Timothy might utilize in his ministry. Indeed, why would Paul refer Timothy to the prophecies spoken over him [1Ti. 1:18]? Why would Paul remind Timothy of his spiritual gift [2Ti. 1:6, 1Ti. 4:14]? Why would Paul tell Timothy to be strong in Jesus' grace [2Ti. 2:1] if the Scriptures alone are all there is? 

 Clearly Paul does not believe the same thing as Mr. Kerns.

Third, we should note that The Chosen is not being presented as a source of biblical information or a reference. It is an artistic depiction of Jesus' life and ministry, not a teaching.)

The Old and New Testaments are all we need and serve as the foundation for everything pertaining to Christian faith and practice.

Unfortunately, our current media and visual centric culture demands more than words on a page. We no longer seem to have a sense of contentment based purely on the written word. (Humans have always been "visual centric." Churches have been holding in-person church gatherings since the first century [Ac. 2:42]. Prior to that the Temple was arrayed as a visual spectacle [2Ch. chapter 4]. The Hebrew people were led by a column of smoke by day and a pillar of fire by night [Ex. 13:21]. The Hebrew prophets spoke many a prophecy, even though they had the Scriptures.

There has never been a time when things have been based purely on the written word.)

As Postman writes, we require amusement. When this amusement comes alongside, takes the place of, or supersedes Scripture, we have removed the Bible as the sufficient guide for the Christian life and replaced it with something else. (Mr. Kerns has replaced elements in his argument. Amusement has nothing to do with whatever useful things might exist beyond the Scriptures.)

True faith is found in and centered on Scripture and nothing else. Romans 10:17 reads, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” (Hooray, our first, Scripture, off topic. Aaand, Mr. Kerns twists it. 

The reader might remember that we were talking about the profitable things useful for the man of God. Without explanation Mr. Kerns switches to the process of salvation. 

He thinks "the word of Christ" is the Bible, but the Greek here is 

• rhḗma [a spoken word, made "by the living voice"] 
• Christos [the Christ]

Notice carefully the phrasing of the verse: "...hearing by the word of Christ." It does not say "hearing the word of Christ." Rather, the "hearing" is by the avenue of the spoken word, who is Christ Himself. The word of Christ enables hearing. 

It's the same Greek word used here:

He. 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word [rhḗma].

The Bible does not sustain the universe, His speaking does. The written word does not save, Jesus does.)

It is through the fully sufficient Word of God, and the power of the Holy Spirit, (Gratuitous mentiond of the Holy Spirit, since Mr. Kerns has repeatedly said that all we need is Scripture, there is nothing else, we don't need The Chosen, etc, etc.)

in which faith is found and by which faith is produced. Likewise, teaching about Christianity and the Christian life must be centered on and grounded in Scripture and Scripture alone. (The author seems given to making undocumented statements. Where in the Bible does it tell us that teaching must be grounded on Scripture and nothing else? After all, the pastor preaches more than just quoting Bible verses. It would seem that this is a violation of Mr. Kerns' statement.

And as we mentioned above, Mr. Kerns' article is also extra-biblical.)

Again, if 2 Timothy 3:16–17 is true, the Christian must rely on Scripture alone because it alone is sufficient for all areas of faith and practice. (Mr. Kerns doubles down, expanding the role of Scripture to it and it alone. This is obviously false.)

Resorting to modern artistic creations to give us a better visualization of who Christ is, a more complete understanding of the humanity of Christ, or a greater sense of connection to Christ denigrates Scripture from its rightful place as the all-sufficient guide for the Christian. (Finally Mr. Kerns gets to the application of his thesis. He claims that non-Bible information violates the sufficiency of Scripture. Non-Bible information diminishes the Bible. Therefore, it seems that a word of encouragement from a brother violates sufficiency. A book about sufficiency violates sufficiency. Our commentary violates sufficiency. Hymns violate sufficiency.

This is total nonsense. No Christian relies on Scripture alone. Not even Mr. Kerns.)

The Christian is to visualize Christ from and through Scripture. (A graven image in the mind is still a graven image. And, we would like to know where in the Bible we are told to do this.)

The Christian understands all he needs to know of the humanity and deity of Christ from and through Scripture. (Um, no.

1Co. 2:14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that  come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

We are beginning to have grave doubts about Mr. Kerns' doctrine.)

The Christian connects fully to Christ through Scripture. The Bible is the sufficient guide. We see Christ in the read and preached Word. No “books for the laity” are needed. (??? What in the world does this mean? Mr. Kerns puts this phrase in quotes as if he's sourcing it from somewhere.)

Second, the Bible is the complete Word of God, from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. Nothing more, nothing less. All of Scripture is equally important. (This is known as tota scriptura. However, it's one thing to acknowledge that the whole of Scripture is inspired, but it's quite another to suggest that every part is equally applicable or important. That simply isn't true.)

Leviticus is no less or more important than Romans; Numbers no less or more than John; Proverbs no less or more than Revelation. Every word of Scripture is, as 2 Timothy 3:16 instructs, the very breath of God. Because every word found in Scripture is the breath of God, every word is important. (These assertions are devoid of documentation. Further, every word of Scripture is inspired is a quite different statement from every word of Scripture is important.)

The Bible is filled with passages warning against the addition or removal of text. The most immediate that comes to mind is Revelation 22:18–19: “I bear witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book. And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.” To be fair with this specific text, most commentators argue it only applies to the Book of Revelation itself. (Since virtually no Christian, including ourselves, is interested in adding or subtracting to the Bible, there is no danger of violating this Scripture.)

Interestingly, however, Beale points out (Mr. Kerns will proceed to quote two extra-biblical sources, yet previously asserted that these are not permissible. We will redact this since we agree that one cannot add to or subtract from the Bible.)

(...) 

How, then, does this apply to The Chosen? 

(...)

If the show is inspired by Scripture, if the creators are concerned with biblical fidelity, and if the main purpose is to please God, then all of Scripture must be followed. (Three true "if" statements followed by a non-sequitur conclusion.)

If only the gospels are consulted or considered, then the show is not inspired by Scripture because the full storyline of Scripture centers on Christ, from Genesis to Revelation. (Does it seem to the reader that the author is getting weirder and weirder? A TV show based on Jesus' life would necessarily emphasize the Gospels. Mr. Kerns seems to have arrived at an "all of the Bible or nothing" standard for "The Chosen." He pulls this out of thin air as if it were gospel truth, and condemns the show, apparently because 

Leviticus is no less or more important than Romans; Numbers no less or more than John; Proverbs no less or more than Revelation. 

So Mr. Kerns rejects "The Chosen" because it has no episodes about Deuteronomy or Hosea. This makes no sense.)

The same holds true for biblical fidelity and pleasing God. So, one would expect, at a minimum, for The Chosen to follow Scripture and not add or subtract words. (Mr. Kerns might expect that, but his opinion is not terribly relevant to the issue at hand. There is no biblical duty to restrict our discussions about Jesus to quoting Scripture and excluding all else. That's just dumb.

Since Mr. Kerns has unfulfilled expectations, and "The Chosen" is not toeing his line, he could just walk away and be done with it.

But he wrote this article. Therefore, there must be some grave danger he as yet to tell us about. But he's running out of time, with only a couple of paragraphs remaining.)

Season three of The Chosen was eagerly anticipated by viewers and, when the trailer released, many were excited. Yet, some were stunned by what seemed to be words from The Book of Mormon put into the mouth of the actor portraying Jesus. In one scene, a pharisee approaches the actor portraying Jesus and demands he renounce his words or the pharisees will be forced to follow the laws of Moses. The actor portraying Jesus responds, “I am the law of Moses.” This is a somewhat direct quote from The Book of Mormon in 3 Nephi 15:9: “Behold, I am the law and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life.” Granted 3 Nephi 15:9 does not record the exact words, “I am the law of Moses,” (Mr. Kerns immediately concedes. So just move on...)

but it does record, “I am the law.”(Interestingly, of the 27 mentions of 3 Nephi 15 from Latter-day Saint leadership from Joseph Smith, Jr. to the present, every person referencing the verse sets it in the context of works-based righteousness, and that count excludes the surrounding context of 3 Nephi 15 itself. There is no mention whatsoever, either in The Book of Mormon or from Latter-day Saint leaders from Joseph Smith, Jr to the present, of this text being a proclamation of Jesus as the one who fulfills God’s law. )) (What about when Jesus said, 

Lk. 24:44 This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.

Or this:

Jn. 5:39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me...

These also sounds pretty close to the actor's statement. But more to the point, the Word is not a book, He is a Person. The law was spoken by God to Moses, i.e., the word was spoken by the Word. The law is the word, from the Word. "I am the law" would be true in that sense.

So we guess one must choose if the actor's statement is Mormon or Christian. 

Or maybe it's just nit-picking.)

Responding to critics in a 2022 video, Jenkins claims the other “I am” statements allow for this addition. He continues, “When he says, ‘I am the law,’ it’s kind of equivalent, in many ways it’s a figure of speech of course because Christ didn’t actually say these exact words in Scripture. We don’t know if he said something like that or not, but we think that it’s certainly possible.”15 Jenkins goes on and admits he has never read The Book of Mormon nor is he quoting from The Book of Mormon. (Well. That would have been nice to know at the beginning. It seems that the line can't have come from the Book of Mormon because Mr. Jenkins has never read it.)

He also claims the line is theologically accurate and plausible. He also states, “I thought the line just sounded like something Jesus would say.”16 (Hmm. Artistic license. We just can't have that, because those three words might cause someone to convert to Mormonism. Or something.)

A few issues need to be addressed here. First, whether or not the line actually comes from The Book of Mormon is not the main issue. In fact, it is not the issue at all. (Sigh. Then why waste our time?)

Because the quote is not found anywhere in Scripture, the source of the quote is human creativity and not God, therefore the place in which the human creativity is found is pointless. (Finally, we agree on something.)

The Book of Mormon is just as non-biblical a place to find additional “quotes from Jesus” as any other spoken words or written text that are manmade. (We agree again.)

Second, arguing the other “I am” statements from Jesus found in the New Testament warrant an additional potential “I am” statement is nonsensical. Any statement beginning with “I am” could be attributed to Jesus with this logic. According to Scripture, Jesus is indeed the author and creator of the law, but that does not make him equivalent to the law. (Is this the claim made by Mr. Jenkins? Where did Mr. Kerns hear about this equivalence?)

Jesus is also the creator of elephants, but that does not make the statement, “I am the elephant,” attributable to Jesus nor does it make him equivalent to the elephant. (A poor illustration, Mr. Kerns. "I am the light of the world" [Jn. 8:12] does not mean He is light itself. "I am the good shepherd [Jn. 10:11] does not mean he's an actual shepherd. These figures of speech illustrate ideas. As such, they're not literal, they're useful to ponder.)

Third, admitting a lack of knowledge of whether or not Jesus said something, but arguing it is possible he really did, is also nonsensical. John 21:25 records, “And there are many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.” Likewise, John 20:30–31 records, “Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.” We know, from these passages in John’s Gospel, that Jesus did indeed do and say things not recorded in the New Testament. (Mr. Kerns again concedes.)

That does not, however, give humanity the artistic license to create the hypothetical actions or statements of Jesus and portray those human-created actions or statements as biblically faithful. (Why not? 

And what about Bible translations, which are attempts to portray in English what was written in Greek and Hebrew. It is well nigh impossible to completely capture the nuance and meaning as originally communicated. We can come close, but increasing accuracy means decreasing readability and thus decreasing comprehension. Translators always strike a balance. Yet no one questions whether translators are being "biblically faithful.")

As we have seen, adding to or taking away from Scripture is expressly forbidden, (No one is adding or taking away from Scripture. No one is getting out their Bible and adding pages to it. This is ridiculous.)

so in creating the “what if” actions or statements of Jesus and arguing those are faithful to the text (Which Mr. Jenkins did not do. Mr. Kerns quoted him: it’s kind of equivalent. The goalposts keep moving.)

is the opposite of biblical fidelity. It is, in fact, expressly unbiblical, blasphemous, and heretical. (Now Mr. Kerns abandons all intellectual processes and dumps charges on The Chosen without having even bothered to establish his case.)

As can be seen, The Chosen can be charged with breaking the Second Commandment, removing Scripture as the all-sufficient guide for Christian faith and practice, and ignoring multiple texts concerning the addition and deletion of texts of Scripture.(Charged, certainly, which is what Mr. Kerns has repeatedly done. But convicted? Nope. Not even close. Mr. Kerns has now crossed the line into caricature. He sounds like a clucking, disapproving aunt at a family reunion.) 

Were the series to be charged with violating any one of these three issues, it would be damnable. (Mr. Kerns doubles down.)

However, with all three in mind, the conclusion must be drawn that Christians taking Scripture for what it says must refrain from watching “The Chosen,” or, for that matter, making use of any other “books for the laity.” (??? Again he uses this phrase. What does it mean?)

Scripture, and Scripture alone, is the sufficient, authoritative, inerrant, infallible, complete Word of God. (True.)

Making an image of any member of the Trinity, for any reason whatsoever, (This apparently was the subject of his previous article. Since he broached it here, let's quickly comment. But first the verses: 

Ex. 20:4-5 You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them...

The Second Commandment is threefold:

• You shall not make idols in any form
• You shall not bow down to them
• You shall not worship them

"Idol" is pesel, a carved image. "Bow down" is shachah, to prostrate one's self before a superior. "Worship" is abad, to serve or be in bondage.

So an idol is a physical representation of something that one bows down before to serve in bondage. In conjunction with the First Commandment, You shall have no other gods before me [Ex. 20:3], we see that God is commanding us to not hold anything to worship above Him.

So unless Mr. Kern can demonstrate for us that The Chosen is being bowed before as a slave, then the discussion must end right here.)

turns the created order on its head and makes God our creation rather than us being God’s creation. We become the ones who control God rather than being controlled by God’s providential care and His perfect word. May we be Christians who follow 2 Timothy 3:16–17 and worship God in ways He has laid out for us. We are His creation, not vice-versa.

References

[1] Postman, 3.

[2] John Frame, The Doctrine of the Word of God (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2010), 220.

[3] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 2nd ed (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2020), 152.

[4] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 1150.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid., 1151.

[7] Ibid., 1152.

[8] John MacArthur, Revelation 12–22 (Chicago: Moody, 2000), 309–310.

[9] Ibid., 310.

[10] Dallas Jenkins, “You Have Questions About the Chosen”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiDdWe2Tb5I.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid. This particular quote is a response to critiques concerning non-Christian cast, crew, and distributors. Nonetheless, his concern for accuracy to Scripture is the main point.

[13] Ibid. In 2019, Jenkins released a video discussion with the three consultants: David Guffey (Roman Catholic priest), Jason Sobel (Jewish rabbi), and Doug Huffman (Professor at Talbot School of Theology). Dallas Jenkins, “The Chosen’s biblical roundtables: Full Episode one discussion”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRN3PtFebyo. Considering their theological positions and works-based soteriology, knowing a Roman Catholic priest and a Jewish rabbi are involved in ensuring fidelity to Scripture is, at the least, deeply troubling.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Interestingly, of the 27 mentions of 3 Nephi 15 from Latter-day Saint leadership from Joseph Smith, Jr. to the present, every person referencing the verse sets it in the context of works-based righteousness, and that count excludes the surrounding context of 3 Nephi 15 itself. There is no mention whatsoever, either in The Book of Mormon or from Latter-day Saint leaders from Joseph Smith, Jr to the present, of this text being a proclamation of Jesus as the one who fulfills God’s law.

[16] Dallas Jenkins, “I quoted Book of Mormon? (How we handle criticism)”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2qT8wKKpb8.

[17] Ibid.