MovieChat Forums > Killing Jesus (2015) Discussion > Killing Jesus Biblically a poor represen...

Killing Jesus Biblically a poor representation of Christ

posted 9 years ago by lroe-369-716143
14 replies | jump to latest

Very disappointing. Inaccurate and a poorly executed film. if one were not familiar with the story of Jesus they would find this movie impossible to follow. The overall flow of the film was so uneven and disjointed to the point of being unwatchable. I expected better from National Geographic. Not only historically strange but multiple Biblical errors and key omissions. I'm left with this question: to whom was this film directed? It certainly failed if directed to a true Christion, not enjoyable to a casual watcher, and embarrassing to a historian. NatGeo should stick to what they do best - and this wasn't it!

[–] ktswaz-1 9 years ago

I totally agree. I watched it because I felt guilty because I wanted to delete it.

[–] Mr_FlyHawk 9 years ago

Inaccurate? The Bible IS inaccurate! This movie is MORE accurate for cutting down on that crap

[–] heinolebt 9 years ago

Exactly what I wanted to write when I saw this thread's title. The bible was written much later and in hindsight it's very easy to make some characters of a story (and the bible is nothing but a story) larger than life.

[–] steviejo46 9 years ago

Except for the empty tomb, the historicity of the apostles, etc. The simple fact is that there's more evidence for the resurrection than there is for Julius Caesar's campaign in Gaul. But that's neither here nor there - I deleted it when John the Baptist was pressed into service to explain Jesus mission and divinity to Jesus. Just a touch too heretical for me!

[–] grim_skunk 9 years ago

The only evidence for the resurrection is the bible, which is pretty weak considering the Romans were notorious for keeping records and they make no mentions of Jesus' miracles. Also, considering the bible is so fantastic in its claims, it's hard to take any of it seriously. How can you use the bible to prove the bible? That doesn't make sense. So much in the bible is contradictory with other evidence that exists, not to mention the accounts in the bible itself are contradictory, I don't think it makes a compelling case as a work of fact. I think it's an important text, but not as the proof of a deity or claims of the supernatural.

[–] heinolebt 9 years ago

Exactly my Point, grim_skunk!
If I wrote a Story like the bible and offered it to a Publisher he would throw the printout in my face and tell me to get rid of all the contradiction. The bible is a fairy tale thrown together by a bunch of People (who might have been on drugs) without anybody editing the text before publication. The sad Thing is that so many People believe this stuff but insist on dindsaurs being pure fiction. Religion is the worst Thing ever to happen to mankind. Apart from buddhism there is not one Religion that really makes anys sense, and I would even call buddhism more of a Lifestyle than a Religion.

[–] steviejo46 9 years ago

If you're looking for extra biblical sources you need look no further than Josephus or Tacitus, a Roman historian, who wrote in Annals, book XV:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

I could go through the proofs of the resurrection ( 11 of the 12 apostles died a martyr's death), He appeared to over a hundred witnesses after His resurrection, He effected history to the point that only until recently was our time marked by His resurrection ( Anno Domini or A.D.) If the tomb still contained His Body, why didn't Pilate or the Sanhedrin just produce it and quash this new religion? If His followers stole it, they would have been the first in history to die for a lie knowing it was a lie. If the tomb was empty, it makes all the difference!

What's your toughest specific problem with the Bible? If I could answer it would you drop your objections? But know that Jesus is still alive and He beckons you and loves you.

[–] Alnivol666 9 years ago

There is no evidence for the ressurection. Stop making this stupid statement. The Bible is written by people who weren't eye witnesses to the events that the texts describe. This are all very known facts.
He affected history...so what? That doesn't make the ressurection true. It just makes people gullible. AD is just a convention that proves nothing.
The new religion started becoming important long after Pilate was dead. If Jesus existed, he was a Jew. There were no Christians around that time. The Bible was composed long after the supposed death of Jesus with a lot of texts that were pretty popular being left out of the cannon.

The story about Jesus's ressurection is just that...a story. As people here already told you, there are no Roman records of the events that you claim are fact. Jesus is more myth than historic fact.

[–] steviejo46 9 years ago

Actually there is more evidence for the resurrection than there is for your existence, but I digress! What is the your greatest obstacle or toughest question and if I can answer would you dare to believe?

[–] distant-skies 9 years ago

It was the Tea Party edit of Jesus. That's all.

Why can't you be a non-conformist like everyone else?

[–] Thought_Criminal_J62377 9 years ago

The Tea Party doesn't poorly represent or hate Jesus/Christianity! The Tea Party stands against anti-American activity. You know, the kind that Obama has engaged in since day 1.

P.S. Liberal=PC and PC is conformity!

Yea, Tho I Walk Thru The Valley Of The Shadow Of Political Correctness...🇺🇸

[–] distant-skies 8 years ago

hahahah

Why can't you be a non-conformist like everyone else?

[–] Destinata 9 years ago

Hollywood NEVER gets any biblical story right. And as for National Geographic being embarrassed by getting a story wrong, are you familiar with National Geographic?

You will probably disagree. That's the nature of discussions -- they have two sides.

[–] jimprideaux2 9 years ago

Interesting post.

What do you consider to be the parts that were historically strange? What were the Biblical errors? What were the key omissions?