MOVIE: Jesus Of Nazareth, by Paul Verhoeven

I am saddened to my very soul to say that the blasphemous book Jesus Of Nazareth, by Paul Verhoeven, is being made into a movie.

 According to press reports Verhoeven’s take on Jesus' life is one in which

•Mary’s Ever Virginity is false: she is rd by a Roman soldier1
•Our Lord is the b
**d child of this crime2
•The Resurrection never happened2
•Jesus was simply a radical prophet2
•Jesus was convinced He would find the kingdom of Heaven on earth2
•Jesus did not know He would be sentenced to die on the cross2
•All of Christ’s miracles are removed because they never happened1

The source was Robert Richie - America needs Fatima

The sad thing is some people will watch this movie and start to believe this junk. :mad:

I just pray that won’t happen, but unfortunately it will with someone. :gopray:

Guarantee that this movie will flop.

The fact that something like this is coming out now, is just typical of Hollywood.

I heard about the movie…I will go see it.

That Mary was raped by a Roman soldier is a story going back to NT times. In the gospels some of the controveries concerning Jesus parantage are addressed…he is called “Son of Mary”…in a patriarchal society a son was called by the name of his father…not his mother unless there was some question concerning who his father was.

When the Pharisees responde to Jesus concerning who his father was…“We were not born of fornication…”…is also indicitive that the rumor of Jesus being a bastard child was already in place…the movie will most likely not get a huge following…but it will get notoriety and play time for sure.

Yes, yes it is.

To you belive this?:eek:

With all due respect, source?

Some additional information about the movie

Biblical movies are all the rage in Hollywood right now, with Darren Aronofsky currently casting his “Noah” for a summer shoot, Ridley Scott looking to tackle Moses for Fox while Steven Spielberg also has a Moses movie brewing for Warner Bros. Meanwhile, “Robocop” and “Showgirls” director Paul Verhoeven wants in on the Biblical epic movement too, specifically with the controversial take on Jesus Christ that he’s been trying to get off the ground since last year. And Verhoeven has taken a couple significant steps forward with his Jesus movie with Muse Productions’ Chris Hanley stepping up to finance the project and screenwriter Roger Avary (“Beowulf,” “Killing Zoe”) hired to write the screenplay.

Verhoeven’s interest in Jesus didn’t occur overnight. Besides being a member of the the Jesus Seminar, the Dutch director published a book he co-wrote last year titled “Jesus of Nazareth.” Not surprisingly, that’s the book that Avary will have to adapt into a screenplay, and who better than Avary, who infamously inspired the heroin sequences in “Pulp Fiction” and directed the drug-fueled morality tales “Killing Zoe” and “Rules of Attraction,” to pen a new, realistic take on Jesus’ life in which his mother is raped by a Roman soldier instead of experiencing an immaculate conception and all of Christ’s miracles from the New Testament are intentionally removed? On the one hand, we’re not being sarcastic, as Avary certainly isn’t afraid to tackle controversial subjects, while on the other hand, we are totally being sarcastic since the movie adaptation is already sure to cause controversy for its non-traditional outlook on Jesus’ history, and Avary’s past work and dubious reputation is sure to stoke the fires already burning in the minds of those who won’t be taken by Verhoeven’s views of Christ. From Avary’s point of view, however, the gig is probably welcome – he was also attached to adapt William Faulkner’s “Sanctuary” last year, and has been trying to rebuild his career after serving a prison sentence for the manslaughter and DUI charges to which he pled guilty in 2009.

As for Verhoeven’s book, the 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. Clearly, it wasn’t a problem for Hanley’s checkbook or for his Muse Productions, whose recent slate includes director Harmony Kormine’s “Spring Breakers” and the in-limbo “Inferno: A Linda Lovelace Story.”


Of course, the author of that article has confused the Virgin Birth of Jesus with the Immaculate Conception of Mary. But I’ve known a lot of Catholics who have confused the two :blush:

Not off the top of my head…Jesus paternity WAS an issue in the early church…the birth narratives were meant to answer the questions concerning his paternity…the references to him being called “Son of Mary” and “not born of fornication” are in the gospels…I’m sure you can find them yourselves.

I’m sure you could also find the sources of the doubt of his paternity in those first centuries of the common era…I had heard about the rape of Mary over 20 years ago…so it’s not ‘new’ by any stretch of the imagination.

What I believe concerning the birth of Jesus can be summed up by one of Paul’s statment…he was “born of a woman, born under the law”…

Many religious icons throughout history had virgin births…that the story eventually made it into Christian thought in the 70-80’s CE…isn’t a surprise.

It developed in the growing Christology of the first century…Paul had taught Jesus was God’s son at the resurrection…Mark indicated perhaps at his baptism…Matthew and Luke at his birth…and finally John…before time The Word was with the father.

I think it will be an interesting movie…I’m sure we’ll hear much more of it like we did “Last Temtation of Christ”…“DaVinci Code” and “The Passion”…not box office blockbusters…but certainly controversial all.

Don’t mean to be confrontational, but I hate the term Common Era. It’s Christian Era.
The way it has been called since the early church.

And, again with all due respect, no source = it didn’t happen. :slight_smile:

I prefer “Common Era”…but your concern is noted and understood why you like “Christian Era” or “Anno Domini” AD.

Just because I don’t have a souce off the top of my head…doesn’t mean the source for the rumor doesn’t exist…I read it over 20 years ago and have seen the reference several times in publications…not having the source at my finger tips doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist…it just means that I don’t have it at my finger tips.:shrug:

It was one of the many theories presented by both early Christians and non Christians about Jesus’ origin. That particular theory was originally put forth by a Pagan by the name of Celsus.

Thank you friend…but since you didn’t cite references…they may not really exist.:slight_smile:

Really awesome resource for information on old religious texts. And it cites plenty sources of its own.

It talks about the rumor of Jesus being raped by a soldier under the ‘The Birth of Jesus’ headline.

Celsus also claimed that Jesus was a sorcerer, which is how he worked his miracles.

But Celsus wrote in the late Second Century, and was opposing Christianity which was already established as a religion. I am not sure he really counts as source from New Testament times (which I suppose ended with the deaths of the original apostles)

Please don’t mention those three films in the same breath… “The Passion” was an exceptionally cathardic affair, while the others were not. That you apparently didn’t like it(relating it to those other films) as a quaker is testimony to how confronting the film is, with the hard historical facts about Roman torture methods and crucifixion’s brutality.

I think the same attention to historical detail will be said for Darren Aronofsky’s Noah(which has actually been in development ever since Passion was a hit in '04, from even before “The Fountain” was made), which is to star Russell Crowe(who else would you cast? he’s a good choice) in the lead role and I think will be an accurate historical portrayal of the biblical story. It’s the religious film I’m looking forward to the most at moment. “The Wresler” had a scene where Marisa Tomei’s stripper character discussed how seeing “The Passion” changed her life, I thought that was clearly Darren writing his own view into the story.

I never would have thought that such an offensive thing could even get a chance of being put as a movie. How could any of those things even be possible? I will pray that this movie doesn’t make it to the theaters or people’s homes.

If it does, I hope it completely flops.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit