Skip to comments.'The Beast' movie: Jesus didn't exist; Former Christian director's secretive film
Posted on 10/12/2004 2:54:10 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
A movie whose purpose is to prove that Jesus Christ never existed and that demonizes Christian fundamentalists is scheduled to open on June 6, 2006 that is, 06-06-06, the "666" biblical mark of the Beast.
Directed by Brian Flemming, who is described on the film's website as a "former fundamentalist Christian," "The Beast" promises to spread the theory he claims is "gaining credibility among scholars" that Jesus was made up out of thin air.
"The authors of the Gospels, writing 40 to 90 years after the supposed life of Christ, never intended for their works to be read as biographies. There are no credible non-Christian references to Christ during the period in which he is said to have lived," states the film's site.
Currently in pre-production, the film's cast and crew are "legally sworn to secrecy," the promotional site says.
Here's how the film's promoters describe its plot:
When her father, a biblical scholar, mysteriously disappears, a Christian high-school student named Danielle investigates. She discovers that he had stumbled across a cover-up of Christianity's best-kept secret: that Jesus Christ never existed.
Now that she possesses proof of this dangerous fact, Danielle must confront two strong forces: a band of fundamentalist Christians who will stop at nothing to suppress the truth, and her own desire for Jesus Christ to be real.
Diving into factual territory well-explored by scholars but largely hidden from the view of the public, "The Beast" is an epic story of innocence lost, faith in crisis and the astonishing power of the truth to survive.
On the trailer, which is viewable on the film's site, ominous music plays while these words flash across the screen: "Centuries ago, a legend was invented forgery fraud coercion wealth greed torture murder war gave it the power to dominate the world." The words are displayed on a background of a painting of Christ's face.
The producers offer a newsletter for those interested in following the making of the movie.
Fleming is touted on the film's website as "internationally acclaimed."
States the site: "Flemming's work has been called 'a parallel universe' by the BBC, 'jaggedly imaginative' by the New York Times, and 'immensely satisfying' by USA Today. The Fox News Channel dubbed him 'a young Oliver Stone.' Flemming won the New York Times Claiborne Pell Award for Original Vision for his groundbreaking feature film 'Nothing So Strange,' which was released theatrically in 2003 and is currently distributed on DVD in more than 200 countries."
Supporters of the film have participated in a discussion forum on the site.
Says one excited poster: "I must say, I highly commend this director for his immense courage on putting something like this out!! The fact that he has the courage to put out a movie about the possibility of Christ never existing after all the controversy surrounding a movie about the LIFE of Christ (well death really) is just amazing!!
"Mad Kudos (and thanks) to EVERYONE involved in the making of this movie and good luck in handling all the 'adverse' reactions!!"
Another participant enthused, "I'm so excited! I can't wait until it's released! This is DEFINITELY the age of Aquarius!!"
Greg Koukl is head of Stand to Reason, a Christian apologetics organization. He says this kind of story line is not unusual among books and movies.
"It always turns out that fundamentalist Christians are the bad guys," he told WorldNetDaily.
"The problem with this is the evidence they draw from is always out on the fringes of academic scholarship" evidence, he says, that is not even used by the leaders of the leftist Jesus Seminar.
Koukl noted historians that have no affinity for fundamentalist Christianity certainly write about Jesus and his impact on history.
"Nobody is trying to explain the indelible mark of Jesus of Nazareth on history by saying he never existed," he said. "That's way beyond the pale. No credible historian would make that claim. It's a bizarre statement from an academic perspective."
Koukl wonders what motive anyone would have to invent Jesus and then "fool everybody."
He dismisses "The Beast" promoters' argument that because no non-Christian accounts of Jesus exist from the time of his life, he must be a fictional character.
"It may be the case that only Caesar wrote about the Gaelic wars," he explained, "but just because there are no other writing about the Gaelic wars doesn't mean we can't trust Caesar," mentioning the four Gospels are themselves four separate accounts of Christ's life.
He mentioned there are a "number of historical references to Christ outside Christianity, which buttress the fact he did exist."
Ted Baehr, founder and publisher of MovieGuide and chairman of the Christian Film & Television Commission, predicts "The Beast" will bomb with American moviegoers.
"Generally, these movies do very poorly at the box office," he told WND. "'Saved!' which had a lot of publicity, did about $6 million at the box office. That's pitiful."
Baehr said bringing the film's contentions into the light of day in the media works well to expose the agenda of its promoters.
"The way you pull the teeth of a false argument is bring up the argument first and show that it's frivolous and fallacious," he said. "Of course it's frivolous. The original apostles wouldn't have gone to their death for Jesus if they didn't believe he was real."
Baehr said, "There is a small group of teenagers who will see ['The Beast'] who will be convinced it is the truth. It will have an impact on a susceptible few."
One of the film's producers, Amanda Jackson, was contacted for this story but did not respond by press time.
If it's only philosophy, then how do explain the aramaic words of Christ only with His Disciples being written down on paper years later.
When Only His Immediate Disciples did He speak this language to? And anyone from those 11 that wrote anything down, would be an accurate testification to that historical event/relationship.
They need to be historically accurate about the Resurection or the rest is a pious fraud.
MORE SKERRY BACKERS' PUPPET MASTER
IDIOCY, SOUNDS LIKE, to me. I see this as another demonic attack on Christianity, the Church and Western civilization as we have known it. These people don't wake up on a Monday morning and decide to lose their minds and souls as an alternative to jogging around the block.
We are in a fierce battle for souls, for our nation, planet and in a sense all creation. Soros and company are driven by demonic forces which have deluded some very controlling megabucks folks into thinking that satan is going to win at Armageddon.
I wonder if there's Soros money in this project. Sounds like something dear to his heart.
God will deal with them all in short order when it suits Him. Until then, we have to put up with the eventual Nazi gestapo tactics of those who agree with him--and the rising goons in the world government headed down the same track as fast as their lies and billions of dollars can carry them.
GET OUT THE VOTE WITH YOUR CONSERVATIVE ASSOCIATES, GROUP!
CHANGE THE MINDS OF AT LEAST 3 MODERATE LIBERALS IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, IN YOUR NETWORK.
ABOVE ALL, PRAY FOR OUR PRESIDENT'S SUCCESS AND THE SAFETY OF HIS FAMILY AND CLOSE ADVISORS.
GOD SAVE OUR REPUBLIC!
You may consider it poor now. These days, any lunatic can espouse any theory he wants, with no fear of incrimination, just alot of winks and nods and people laughing behind his back.
But matters were quite different back then. The penalties for misrepresentation were a little bit more severe. Crucifixion, being stoned to death, in some cases being burned or buried alive.
So if a person maintained something, he had better believe it fully, and be prepared with some kind of corroborating evidence.
They were a bit grumpier back in those days.
Who would have believed anybody who talked? Miracles are ultimately useless in conversion because 1) If it didn't happen on TV it didn't happen, and 2) If it DID happen on TV it must have been faked. See Exodus. People take the miracles then always demand more. No, faith is built on something other than miracles.
Cash is probably the true motivator behind this.
From another thread.....
In the 'Afterword' section of, The Last Disciple, book is mentioned that Tyndale House is 'coming out' with a new title called, 'Exegetical Eschatology'.
My guess is that it will be on George E. Ladd's, 'Historical (Preterism) Pre-millenniumism mixed with Dodd's 'Universalism'.
It will NOT 'expose' EVANGELICALISM's Progressive Dispensationalism as being the same as 'Historic Pre-millenniumism. ie. Post-Tribulationism.
The Beast (Nero).........says it all.......?
I understand that. There never really was a vendetta of sorts by the Romans against the Christians. But the Christians of the time denounced the Roman Gods, and thereby sealed there fate.
On another matter, it is rumored that Severus Alexander, the youngest Emperor of Rome ever, had interesting statues in his private church. Statues of the Roman gods, and a statue of an old guy named Ibrahim, and another (mythical) fellow named Chrestus.
Alexander, while not one of the most revered emperors, had been afforded the height of Roman education and resources.
I suspect he himself had some direct evidence of Christ.
there fate = their fate
too late..... yawn...
No contemporary historian mentioned him.
It was alleged that Josephus mentioned him but that was exposed as an later insertion.
Not entirely true. He also mentions in another section, the death? of the brother of James.
This passage is generally accepted as speaking of James, Jesus's brother, and Jesus himself.
And it is also accepted as being authentic.
"That news of an earthquake followed by deceased persons arising did not spread immediately is full proof of a hoax."
I don't think earthquakes were so rare at the time that the Romans would have sent their special correspondents over to Jerusalem. And the evidence for the dead coming back to life would have been - a lot of living people, who claimed they were dead once. You see how it sounds.
It's odd to get hung up on some talking point about why the Romans didn't apparently mention a miraculous event, if they didn't. Most people instinctively - and quite sensibly - dismiss reports of miraculous events unless they experience them first hand. The Church itself automatically assumes reported miracles to be false unless there is excellent evidence. So why would the Romans have been any different?
God and Jesus are not an intellectual conversation. They are the belief in your soul. There are some things in life that one knows without seeing.
There must be lots of Roman historians who wrote of an earthquake accompanied by the dead wandering the town. Tacitus? Pliny? Seutonius? Someone should check because that would just clinch it!
And in your last post you said:
But the wandering dead were seen by "many." Did these people keep it to themselves? I used to live in a town of 20,000: news of anything spread like wildfire. That news of an earthquake followed by deceased persons arising did not spread immediately is full proof of a hoax.
The major historians lived in or close to Rome at the time. In a town of 20,000 people, with telephones, modern transportation, and television, of course news is going to spread like wildfire. Whether it did in Jerusalem or not, we cannot say either way. That entire part of the Empire was considered to be quite backwater at the time. In an empire that spreads across the entire Mediterranian Sea, rumors such as that take months (if not years) to spread, if they are spread at all. There were no railroads, no cars, no planes, no steam or electric ships - there were horse and carriage and there were VERY slow ships. People did not travel very much.
On top of this, the information was spread by word of mouth. If someone tells you by word of mouth that there was an earthquake in a backwater part of the empire and that dead people were walking down the street, you would more likely than not simply chalk it up to rumor. Furthermore, "investigative reporting" wasn't exactly on anyone's agenda back then. If you lived in Rome and heard "mystical stories" about things that happened in far away lands, it was most likely not on top of your list of "things to do" to go out and spend the next twenty years of your life travelling to that place to find out whether it was true or not. In times like that, stories of such events are always floating around.
Thanks, I will check it out.
Ah, yes. Satan's rebuttal to "Passion of the Christ"...
i see crowds of christians with brochures outside the theatre, life-size cross replicas... prayer vigils. stories by the anti-christian media how the "mean christians' made the atheists "feel uncomfortable". i would personally favor churches showing "the passion of the christ" at the same time this horrible lie is being shown to give an alternative to people to get the real story. that's probably wishful thinking on my part.