I was absolutely dumb-founded when I watched this "historical" account of how the canon of the Bible was formed. It was stated that Constantine did this on a political move and required the already divided church to choose what books would compile the book we now call the Bible. The "re-enactment" depicted 10 red-faced religious leaders thrusting parchments at each other while Constantine looked on. The church had to begin to officially state (though that which was accepted as scripture was already clear) what writings were considered canonical early on because of Marcion the heretic who created the "first" canon - excluding any books that looked favorably on the Jews. Also, the church was ecumenical at the time, in agreement in doctrine and practices as still evidenced in the liturgies. And it was 318 leaders who had survived the persecution of Diocletian, who came together to refute the Arian heresy(which stated that there was a time when Christ was "not")at the Council of Nicaea. Not 10 morons. And it's historically known that it was Athanasius who officially first presented the 27 ecumenically, unanimously accepted books of the New Testament, in his Festal letter of 367. I am just incredulous that the History Channel could get away with such a travesty of presenting this as a historical account when the truth is so readily acceptable. Heck, one can Google "Athanasius", "Council of Nicea", "Arian Heresy", "Marcion" and take 5 minutes to learn what really happened. Absolutely unbelievable.
Review of Banned from the Bible II
