The Beast

[Norseman]

It will be taken entirely too seriously by people who are unable to distinguish fact from fiction, or sound research from a good plot line. Conspiracy theorists will slobber with excitement, and fundamentalists will slobber with rage. A well-known religious leader will appear on Hannity and Colmes or some comparable show, denouncing the movie. Hal Lindsey and/or Jack Van Impe will mention the movie as proof that the end is near. It will turn out to be an unremarkable movie, but will do pretty well at the box office because of the controversy.

Aside from the Hal Lindsey/Jack Van Impe reference (who I've never heard of) I agree completely.

 

[Heiroglyph]

It looks retarded.

 

[Quijote]

I wish I could say that I'm not seeing the movie on principle....but the reality is that w/three kids (four by the time the movie comes out) we don't get to the theaters that often anyway (and when we do is usually for a kids movie)

On the subject of the movie, I would like to see a remake or update of the "omen" series (well, not the third "omen"...that one was dumb). Those movies were good to see, scary, and were [pretty much] in line with Christian teaching about the "beast".

But in the end, it's only a movie that would probably be hyped to no end and not do very well in theaters.

cheers

 

[AudioArtist]

Perhaps the movie is a self-fulfilling prophecy...

 

[praying]

There is a new movie being released on the 6/6/2006, preaching the message that Jesus never actually existed.

http://www.thebeastmovie.com/

I wonder what effect it will have?

Not much me thinks it's a movie.

 

[Bunnaroo]

Effect? Probably none. Atheism is generally a self-evident path, so if you don't see it already, this movie probably won't help you. It might nudge some agnostics further away from Christianity, but most English speaking non-believers are already moved well away from Christianity, mostly by creationists and televangicals who give it a bad name, so again, I doubt this movie will have much impact.

Edit: I also doubt many Christians will watch it, so again, I suspect it will have very little impact.

I would reccomend "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. He started off trying to prove Christianity was a bunch of baloney. This book is a compilation of his notes, including the references that he found historical accounts.

 

[elginX]

At a brief skim before I lay my weary head to bed, I can't really see any proof of anything. Just writings that came well after the death of Christ, which may or may not be fictional.

Much of what we teach as "history" comes from these early scholars. One cannot claim some of thier writings as historial facts and denounce others as fiction. If we ignored the writings of everyone, Christian and non christian, who made references to Jesus then we would lose much of our ancient history.

 

[Kelly]

At a brief skim before I lay my weary head to bed, I can't really see any proof of anything. Just writings that came well after the death of Christ, which may or may not be fictional.

I don't think anyone will ever find 'proof' of Christ's divinity through history texts. The truth is not revealed through knowledge.

Jesus said "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children." Matthew 11:25

 

[Cliche Guevara]

Much of what we teach as "history" comes from these early scholars. One cannot claim some of thier writings as historial facts and denounce others as fiction. If we ignored the writings of everyone, Christian and non christian, who made references to Jesus then we would lose much of our ancient history.

But, usually, there is some material proof of their existance. Something created during their life to honor them - busts, portraits or statues that were done in their lifetime - for example. Or their own writings that are still in existence. Alexander, Hadrian, Plato, Tutenkamen, and many others, all have physical evidence of them having existed. While much of what is said about them is from early scholars who lived a hundred or more years later, concrete evidence is still out there. This is not the case with Christ.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

I don't think anyone will ever find 'proof' of Christ's divinity through history texts. The truth is not revealed through knowledge.

Jesus said "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children." Matthew 11:25

"Proof" of divinity would be a near impossible to thing to prove - but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the existence of the man, as a man - alive and breathing here on earth.

 

[Quijote]

"Proof" of divinity would be a near impossible to thing to prove - but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the existence of the man, as a man - alive and breathing here on earth.

This site quotes pagan, Jewish and Christian Historical references to Christ:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

a small excerpt:



A. Tacitus

We possess at least the testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) for the statements that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy. Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confounds the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv).

B. Suetonius

Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero, xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church.

C. Pliny the Younger Of greater importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christian belief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).

cheers

 

[IncogNEAT-O]

But, usually, there is some material proof of their existance. Something created during their life to honor them - busts, portraits or statues that were done in their lifetime - for example. Or their own writings that are still in existence. Alexander, Hadrian, Plato, Tutenkamen, and many others, all have physical evidence of them having existed. While much of what is said about them is from early scholars who lived a hundred or more years later, concrete evidence is still out there. This is not the case with Christ.

Good point. I wonder how many statues exist of Jewish historical figures. Seems to me there was some prohibition against idols, which was/is often translated to mean any sort of statue. Given that, it would seem understandable why there are no busts of Christ...while non-Jewish historical figures, such as those you mentioned, have plenty of statuary to their credit.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

You both make good points. I'll read up on your links over the weekend.

In the meantime - I gotta get to work!

 

[Quijote]

You both make good points. I'll read up on your links over the weekend.

In the meantime - I gotta get to work!

Have fun! (but not too much)

cheers

 

[k]

I would like to see them back this statement up:

"There are no credible non-Christian references to Christ during the period in which he is said to have lived."

Guess they never heard of Josephus. Duh!

This is American sensationalism at its best. People are superstitious and the Right wing will play into the Producer's hands like children in a candy store because they are counting on most of their publicity to come from that side of the fence.

If people wish to argue who Jesus is that is cool...but to try and ignore the fact that he existed is nothing short of blind hatred.

 

[Heiroglyph]

Christ rose from the dead. His tomb is empty. That is all the proof you need right there.

 

[Randall McNally]

I would like to see them back this statement up:

"There are no credible non-Christian references to Christ during the period in which he is said to have lived."

Guess they never heard of Josephus. Duh!

Josephus has a not insignificant cadre of scholarly detractors who believe there is compelling evidence for the forging or embellishment of the Christ references.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Actually a well-balanced treatment, that.

 

[k]

Josephus has a not insignificant cadre of scholarly detractors who believe there is compelling evidence for the forging or embellishment of the Christ references.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Actually a well-balanced treatment, that.

We are discussing the existence of Jesus, not his Divinity. There are plenty of other non-Christian sources, some of which have already been posted on this thread.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

Christ rose from the dead. His tomb is empty. That is all the proof you need right there.

And where is his tomb?

I've lived in Jerusalem, and there are 2 places attributed to being Christ's tomb.


As for questioning whether or not Christ really existed in the flesh, that is not "blind hatred", that is merely questioning the existence of Christ in the flesh.

For the most part, I have no problem with people believing whatever is it they believe spiritually - I just have a problem with the political rightwing aspects of those beliefs, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, tribal superstitions, or whatever.

 

[Kelly]

I just have a problem with the political rightwing aspects of those beliefs

I have a twofold response to this. First and foremost, people use religion to sell their politics, unfortunately, that's just going to happen. We just have to watch and judge by the fruits as it were. Second, and more importantly, most faiths don't seperate worship from everyday life. Meaning that it influences every decision you make, including politics.