Website of photography loving, mac-using, Christian molecular biology graduate working in web design.
Story at ABC News.
When I saw this headline my first reaction was “Nice.” The kind of “nice” you would say to someone burping in your face, or letting a really loud, wet-sounding fart rip, or possibly vomiting on your freshly dry cleaned silk dress.
The news story isn’t any more informative than the headline, so all I can say is that I’m glad that a film director thinks he knows more about Jesus’ life than the people that actually lived with him.
Previous post: NSW banning laser pointers?
Next post: San Francisco City Hall
kristarella.com is the personal blog of Kristen Symonds — a molecular biology graduate now working in web design, and expert of the Thesis WordPress theme. Other interests and post topics include Christianity, photography, Macs, iPhones and life.
If you've found my tutorials helpful please consider donating or checking out these recommended products. Thanks!
{ 8 comments }
I suppose when Verhoeven makes a film version of his book, it’ll star Sharon Stone as Mary and Michael Douglass as the Roman soldier who raped her. Maybe Elizabeth Berkeley can play Mary Magdalene…
He’s a story teller, nothing more, a party freak :party:.
its Verhoeven :-D
Just a american rant ;-)
Thanks guys! Glad you take him as seriously as I do :)
or letting a really loud, wet-sounding fart rip
That was a bit too much for me….
Live From Las Vegas
The Masked Millionaire
Aww, sorry ’bout that. Perhaps you more than others can recognise how disgusting, or off-putting, or just plain disappointing I find endeavours like the one above.
You might be pleased to know that I very rarely write anything like that. ;)
The people who actually lived with him would not necessarily know the circumstances of his birth, if you mean the people he associated with as an adult, who were involved in the gospels, which at any rate date from decades after Jesus’s death and after his biography was passed from worshipper to worshipper in a game of Chinese telephone.
Verhoeven is starting from the assumption that the virgin birth is not true. You believe otherwise, but for a moment assume for the sake of argument that there was no virgin birth. Where does that lead you? Two possibilities: Joseph was the father, but in that case, why make up the story of the virgin birth?
But if Mary was raped, especially in the culture of the time, it would be shameful, and the woman would be blamed and she might conceivably try to keep it a secret. After all, rape is the most underreported crime even today. And look what happens to rape victims in some Muslim countries.
Alternatively, Joseph may have know about the rape. In that case you would think he would just claim the child as his own if he decided to stay with Mary. But who knows.
Other than the fact that it’s just taboo to even discuss something like this, Verhoeven’s theory seems pretty plausible to me. More plausible than a virgin birth, certainly. Occam’s razor and all.
NICE!!! FREAKS!!!!!!!!
Comments on this entry are closed.