Henrik Engedal Nissen I think it's excellent. I just saw the episode about Jerico and it's interesting how they use different experts in different areas like military, archaeological etc. to see the story from different angels. That makes the series trustworthy as I see it. They don't seem to have any presumptions. Many programs like this seems to have an agenda to somehow prove that the Bible must be wrong, but this program seems much more objective and open to different possibilities. For me it's refreshing that they use the Bible as a source and shows how it is possible that the Bible tells the truth - but at the same time they also show other options, from people who are skeptical about the Bible.A very good program!

westcottjohn The series has good production value and the narrator's voice is pleasing to listen to, but even the legally blind could easily see the bad science on display here. The patently religious believers go into the subject with a conclusion already in mind and go out of their way to ensure that it is found to be true. If you're looking for actual evidence to be fairly evaluated and presented, you're watching the wrong show.The evidence for Sodom's existence, the existence of the Staff Of Moses, or that the Shroud Of Turin dates to the time of Jesus just does not objectively exist, and this series often presents it as if it does, discounting other pieces of evidence or concocting it's own "facts" out of supposition and rectally derived, baseless theories.

puzzledresearcher "Secrets of the Bible" is being shown in America on the American Heroes Channel, which is a Discovery Communications minor cable network. Discover Communications likes to describe itself as "The World's #1 Nonfiction Media Company."That attribution however does not apply to "Secrets of the Bible". This show is clearly aimed at a demographic who are not looking for a critical evaluation (either through science or history) of the Bible but who are seeking to perhaps reconcile some creeping doubts about their beliefs and are looking for reinforcement. It probably will find an audience in the American Bible Belt. It will also appeal to those who want to steep themselves in mysticism.As far as entertainment value - it has more than the worst of cable TV programs, but here I find it hard to give rating stars to the program on a network that is purportedly about history when the show is more a constructed drama.The most recently aired episode, on Sodom, is a classic case of selectively editing supposed "experts" to fit the show narrative. Objectively in modern archeology no one can claim to have identified any such city, and many scholars of the Jewish literature do dismiss Sodom as mythology. Yet "Secrets of the Bible" pushes forward the narrative that Sodom is a real place and builds for us a narrative about a brave rebel archaeologist (Collins) who is fighting the establishment's view about Sodom.This series may not be without any merit, but again I have to ask - does this show have anything more to do with reality than say all those UFO shows which clutter up cable networks so hungry for viewers that psychics and underwater Alien bases are put up as "history" or "science"? My answer is not really, or not noticeably any better to be worthy of the marketing moniker "The World's #1 Nonfiction".

Paul Lysen The episode on the archaeology of Jericho, especially, was a welcome antidote to the atheistic skepticism infecting most shows purportedly investigating Biblical history. The archaeologist featured in this episode discovered that the data on Jericho supported the Bible's account and demonstrated that the famous Kathleen Kenyon's work corrupted the evidence to discredit the historical accuracy of the Bible. Two other episodes were also commendable for presenting views of Biblical events with other than smirking skepticism: the episode regarding the location of Mt. Sinai and the episode involving the Shroud of Turin. I applaud the people who produced this series and I hope to see more of their work.