Posted on 06/25/2012 10:04:26 AM PDT by Kaslin
It's taken over four years for film director Paul Verhoeven to get anyone to turn his 2008 book "Jesus of Nazareth" into a movie, but numerous sources last week say he's finally done it.
Deadline reported last Tuesday that Muse Productions will produce the film claiming Jesus Christ was the product of Mary being raped by a Roman soldier:
Jesus might have been the product of his mother being raped by a Roman soldier, which Verhoeven said was commonplace at the time, and that Jesus was a radical prophet who performed exorcisms and was convinced he would find the kingdom of Heaven on earth, and did not know he would be sentenced to die on the cross by Pontius Pilate. That, and the discounting of the miracles that pepper the New Testament, has made this a daunting project to set up.
Those not familiar with his name certainly will recognize some of Verhoeven's directorial hits including "Robocop," "Total Recall," and "Basic Instinct."
Roger Avary, who won an Oscar for co-writing 1994's "Pulp Fiction," has been tapped to adapt the book into a screenplay.
Indiewire noted Wednesday:
[T]he adaptation will depict Jesus in a more human light, hence the reason the miracles and the resurrection are being stripped from the story. Instead, Jesus will be portrayed as an ethicist and a radical prophet, whose message became too politically strong for the Romans to idly accept and endure. While that version may not seem blasphemous to Verhoeven, it more than likely is for many.
That's got to be next, right?
“Muse Productions will produce the film claiming Jesus Christ was the product of Mary being raped by a Roman soldier:”
With Trayvon Martin as ‘Jesus’ and George Zimmerman as the ‘Roman Soldier’.
What ancient claim? Where did you get this from?
It's one thing to blaspheme Jesus Christ. It is quite another matter to blaspheme the Holy Ghost by attributing His miraculous work in the birth of Christ to rape by a Roman soldier. That is an unforgivable sin. (Mark 3:28-30)
I read another article a few days ago about this movie and, curious about the Roman-raped-Mary angle, looked into it. I found that the rumor starts with the koran's depiction of the immaculate conception where a man appears before Mary (the Bible depicts this incident as an angel appearing before Mary). It has been speculated that Mohammed had heard the story of Jesus and was just recounting it the best he could, in a chinese-telephone kind of way. Somehow this story out of the koran has been morphed into a Roman raping Mary. Not surprising since non-Christians are used to twisting the Bible to justify their agendas. It's actually refreshing to see that they're making an effort to misquote the koran. I think it will be great fun to point out to the muslims how the makers of this movie have blasphemed their holy book.
To Lucky9teen: “...I certainly would not want to be in there shoes, IF they ever stand at the pearly gates.”
Romans 14:11
It is written: “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’”
Yes, Lucky, they will be there at the Pearly Gates awaiting judgement. It’s not going to be pretty for them. And its forever. (that’s a long time!)
That's not just wrong, it's stupid.
Roman soldiery didn't go around raping people at random. That kind of action was restricted to wars and campaigns, specifically to beatdowns that liberal KGB types like to call "normalization".
Judaea in 1 B.C. (or 4 B.C., or whichever year you like) was governed by a Roman ally and client prince in Herod and therefore would not have been subject to the kind of rocks and shoals Verhoeven is daydreaming about.
Intellectual onanism.
LMAO!!
Well Jews don’t believe he is the Messiah, so it does not surprise me
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.