Posted on 03/29/2015 8:23:01 PM PDT by impactplayer
I just watched "Killing Jesus". To say I was disappointed is an understatement. I found it unbearable. I understand adding pieces between the lines to flesh out the story for TV, but totally re-writing the Bible is beyond the pale. The stories of John the Baptist death, the trial before Pilot, and especially Judas and the 30 pieces of silver are totally rewritten, and the original was much better. I saw no one in this film worthy of worship, much less praise.
Sorry, O'Reilly - You missed the mark on this one.
The scene I’m thinking of was when Judah was on the death march through the desert, and he stumbled and fell, it was Jesus who gave him a drink of water. Maybe they didn’t show his face then, but they portrayed him in clean clothing and clean hair. I usually watch it right around Easter anyway, so I’ll check it out and see if it’s what I remember.
But, the best part was when the guard came over and yelled at Jesus, and then Jesus just stood up and was face to face with the guard; the look on the guard’s face said a lot to me - the guard was stunned, recoiled, and he backed up.
To me .. that’s how I felt Jesus would have affected people who were evil. So, to portray Jesus as filthy, ragged, grubby, IT JUST DOESN’T FIT. And, I do realize that in that day personal cleanliness was not a priority - I’ve always believed Jesus would have stood out because he would have been personally clean, as well as his clothing - and would not have looked like the rest of them. Just my personal opinion.
I think I remember seeing King of Kings, but that’s where my recollection ends. Ben Hur has always been my favorite.
Yeah, that’s a good point. Maybe my portrayal is off, but some of the oldest portraits of Jesus never showed him as being ARAB; at least none that I’ve seen.
But, I do see your point - after the Jews were dispersed, they mixed with Europeans who were lighter skinned.
I love Ben Hur too...and what a coincidence...it’s next up in my Netflix queue and will probably be in my mailbox today!
The reaction shot with the Roman Guard is so powerful that it would seem that you actually DID see the Face of Jesus, as well as the part with the water, which is echoed later when Judah attempts to help Jesus as He struggles under the Cross.
If you have a chance, rent the “Anniversary” DVD with the extra commentary, actor bios, interviews, etc. Then make a huge pot of tea and tub of popcorn and settle in for about eight hours of magnificence! :-)
“The Ten Commandments” Box Set is also wonderful! :-)
So disappointed but when I heard that a Muslim was going to be the main character I knew in my heart that this was going to be nothing but a mockery against Jesus .... Geez they didn’t even try to fool the audience from the get-go when Elizabeth greets Jesus in the courtyard he looked baffled like what is she talking about expression...I knew immediately Jesus was going to be portrayed as a buffoon. What a piece of dump this movie turned out to be!! From 1 to 10 I give this movie a Big fat moldy tomato!!
Yes indeed. That is the same impression i got.
But, HUZZAH!, the 30 minutes i gave to that atrocity were NOT wasted. I played all the scales and modes on my guitar (unplugged), so at least my fingers were getting exercise while my brain and soul were being battered.
Oh I didn't see it that way. I thought Satan was made to look androgynous on purpose. Neither male or female.
And another thing, dear heart, in that Genesis account. Abraham said to the servant that they would go up to the mountain and “they could come down again”. Abraham believed in Isaac’s resurrection if he was, indeed, slain. Because all of God’s promises were through Isaac’s seed. Therefore, Abraham, knew that God was true to His word —so, he would have to resurrect Isaac in order for fulfill His promises.....that little bit of text is often overlooked....
Bookmark
Yes, you are correct. And we understand it the more when we read the following in Hebrews Chap 11...
“Heb 11:17-19 When God tested Abraham, faith led him to offer his son Isaac. Abraham, the one who received the promises from God, was willing to offer his only son as a sacrifice. (18) God had said to him, “Through Isaac your descendants will carry on your name.” (19) Abraham believed that God could bring Isaac back from the dead. Abraham did receive Isaac back from the dead in a figurative sense.”
You can expect junk like that when you cast a Muslim as Jesus.
“...after the Jews were dispersed, they mixed with Europeans who were lighter skinned.”
David, son of Jesse, was fair complexioned, or of fair countenance…there is also some thought that David had red hair…
“1Sa 17:42 And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance.”
I have another special video I’m planning to watch today.
I saw it sometime ago, but finally have my own copy.
“The Privileged Planet”
If you haven’t seen it, please do. It’s a stunning portrayal of why the EARTH was always a special planet, created for a special purpose. Amazing.
I knew it was going to go bad when the Magi visited Bethlehem. They didn’t; they went to Nazareth where Joseph and Mary lived. It portrayed Mary Magdalene as a reformed prostitute; not a shred of Biblical evidence to support that. It even misquoted Jesus about the Golden Rule, turning it completely bass ackwards. Makes one wonder, despite O’Reilly’s boast of how much research he and Dugard did, whether they did any at all.
This is probably what he aiming for.
Besides, I had no desire to see them trash Christianity anyway
I’ve seen it!
Terrific Movie (and premise for a movie!)
For some reason, their own imaginations about how it might have happened carried more weight than the well documented eye witness accounts of several different people on the seen at the time. I have no explanation for this - but the thing I found the most disturbing was that I didn’t even like the “Jesus” as portrayed in this film. He was a very dark character, not at all appealing. Certainly no one I would give my life for. Very sad . . .
If you are familiar with Bible, the book really helps with the geography, how Israel was governed, Herod and the three year ministry.
For example, Jesus overturned the money tables on his first and third passover visit. The book goes into detail to this detail which helps clarify his three year ministry. Yet the movie only showed the last incident.
Also the historical inaccuracies in the movie as mentioned in this thread are NOT in the book. The very inaccurate exchange between John the Baptist and Jesus is not in the book.
The movie leaves the impression that Jesus come to realize he is the Messiah rather than the biblical account that Jesus was the incarnate word. The book does is not imply Jesus comes to understand he is the Messiah, but supports he claimed to be the Messiah.
I just posted inaccuracies in the Movie not in the book. This is another. The Bible does not mention where the Magi found Jesus but it is inferred not in Bethlehem. Herod executed young boys in Bethlehem and the area because of prophesy. B
Thanks - I have not read the book, so this helps. Movies very often miss the point of the book.
Deduction. Joseph and Mary took the baby to the temple in Jerusalem 40 days after Jesus was born and then (Luke 2:39) returned to Nazareth. The Magi (Matthew 2:11) came to the house (not stable) where the child (not infant) was. Herod had “inquired of (the Magi) diligently what time the star appeared.” They must have told Herod that the Messiah had been born about 2 years previously, which is why Herod had all the male children 2 and under slaughtered, to ensure that he got the right one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.