Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News


Hola all. Massawyrm here. You know, leave it to Hollywood to capitalize upon the success of a really great movie. But despite the obvious potential for a sequel (I mean, come ON! The end of the first film even showed him coming back. They were totally trying to set up a sequel) Hollywood opted to make a prequel to Passion of the Christ. I guess with the sheer amount of deserving deaths awaiting the Jews from the first film, Gibson’s probably got the rights to that story locked down pretty tight. So a prequel it is. This time around Jesus is being pursued by the ancient world version of a Bond villain, simply named Herod, who, knowing of Jesus’s amazingly bad assed ability to take a lickin’ and keep on tickin’ (I mean, really, he’s like Roman era John McClane) that he’s gonna try to kill him before he’s even born. So he sends out an army of Roman soldiers to try and find the unwed mother pregnant with the savior of humanity. I know, I know, I know. I know what you’re thinking. I liked this story a lot better when it was called The Terminator. I guess someone at New Line thought that it would be better with Roman soldiers instead of killer robots. Which is exactly why James Cameron is a genius. Everything is better with killer robots. Especially the story of Jesus. But don’t think they removed all of the science fiction elements, because for some reason Dr. Bashir from Deep Space 9 keeps beaming down into people’s dreams to boss them around. You’re going to have a son and you’re going to name him Jesus. No shit. I hope she names him Jesus, because that’s kind of who the movie is about. Which is kind of sad when you think about it, because Jesus doesn’t even show up until the end, and even then, you only get to see him as a baby. I guess Caviezel wasn’t available. Sometimes you have to write around that kind of thing. Then there’s this weird plot about this ambiguously gay trio of wise asses who notice that three stars are going to conjoin and when they do the single greatest badass in cinema history will be born. So they spend the whole movie riding camels and cracking jokes just to stop by and say “Oh, hey, look. It’s the single greatest badass in cinema history. In, like, 33 years that guy is totally gonna get the shit beat out of him.” Then they leave presents. One guy leaves gold, another leaves frankincense – then the third guy gives the other guys a look like “What the fuck? We said nothing over $20. Now I look like a total asshole. All I brought was myrrh.” Okay. I’ve got to give it to New Line. I mean, I really see where they were going with this. Someone was thinking Hey, if Passion of the Christ could make $600 Mil with an “R” rating, imagine the amount of money we could make with a “PG” rated film! Just think of it! A family rated Christian Film! Um, yeah. As a life long Christian, I’ve got some news for you. Christians? We make pretty shitty movies on the whole, especially when we try to make movies for other Christians. If you have any doubts about that, I highly recommend you spend a day or two watching the Fox Family channel. Not that I’d actually recommend that, but it would certainly prove my point. The Christians that are good enough to slip through the cracks seem to be few and far between – kinda like white guys in the NBA. But, for a moment, let’s examine The Nativity Story as if there had never been a film made with the word “Passion” nor the word “Christ” in the title. As a family film, as a Christian film and as a story of the birth of Jesus, this film isn’t half bad. In fact, compared to other Christian films, it’s pretty damn good and ultimately watchable. There are a few odd choices that some folks might not care for – like the three wise men being played for laughs (I’m not kidding) - but all in all, it certainly isn’t painful or preachy. All of the actors do fine jobs, especially Ciaran Hinds (Miami Vice, Munich, Sum of all Fears) as Herod who really does an excellent job bringing him to life and Alexander Siddig (Syriana, Deep Space 9) does a really good job with some pretty bland dialog taken straight out of the Bible – managing to breath emotion into some very stiff material. However, there WAS a film called Passion of the Christ. And it completely raised the bar on this kind of film. Gibson took a lot of risks and made a film that transcended religion and proved to be a religious film that even non-believers could enjoy and be affected by. By presenting the film in its original languages (despite the use of Church Latin, rather than the original pronunciation) and with such raw, unfettered brutality in the torture sequences, Passion had this feeling of authenticity, as if you were there at the actual crucifixion. And despite having heard the story every Palm Sunday once a year for every year of their life, and despite being able to recite the tortures in order, verbatim – Christians saw the death of Christ in a way they never imagined it. And through the violence and suffering, Christ’s ultimate message of love despite all things shone through loud and clear. For many it was an epiphany, an understanding of exactly how far Christ went to make his point about loving your enemies no matter what. And despite the “R” rating - despite the violence that many Christians vocally take issue with in other films – the film brought tears to the eyes of many and became the gold standard of Christian filmmaking. And it even managed to touch many non-believers, especially those whose only exposure to the teachings of Christ are through the boneheads that picket Wal-Mart every year for their use of the phrase “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas.” But this film ain’t Passion of the Christ. It ain’t even close. By whitewashing several of the elements of the Nativity and by flinching when it should go all the way, the story of the birth of Christ (which if you’re not completely familiar with it, isn’t exactly the sweetest of stories) doesn’t seem the slightest bit profound or enlightening. The film spends enough time setting up Herod’s order to kill all of the male children in Bethlehem under the age of two, but then drops it and pulls its punches when it needs it most. Mary and Joseph get a few wayward glances over the whole “unmarried pregnancy” thing, but it gets a pass with an offhand joke. And the manger is a surprisingly clean little cave that just happens to have animals in it. Even the hardship of the journey seems a bit toned down. And having seen a film in its original historical language, watching another from the same time period performed in English seems to remove all authenticity. Remember how in Ewoks: The Battle for Endor all the ewoks suddenly spoke English rather than their original dialect of Yub Nubs? Remember how wrong and disconcerting that was? It’s kinda like that. It just doesn’t feel right. This feels in every way like a “YOU’VE READ THE BOOK, NOW SEE THE MOVIE!” kind of film. It’s not going to make you look at the Nativity story in a new light, it won’t cause you to re-examine or strengthen your faith. And to anyone not of the faith, it’s probably gonna bore you to tears. But it is family-friendly. And I can definitely see this as a great tool for sharing the story of the birth of Christ with children on Christmas Eve if you are one of those “He’s the reason for the season” folks. But there’s absolutely no reason at all to see this if you’re not Christian. It just doesn’t have anything special to offer. Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em. Massawyrm
Well, it certainly looks like my reservations for a good table in Hell are a lock – but just in case…

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:05 a.m. CST




  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:06 a.m. CST



    I for one am tired of Jesus movies... Let the Mel Gibson jokes begin... twats...

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Merry Christmas Charlie Brown

    by BirdMcMonster

    Linus' recitation of the Gospel of Luke will probably still be my favorite version of the Nativity Story.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:18 a.m. CST

    It's a shame

    by Captain Mal

    This had the potential to be a great film. One could even imagine it as a sort of action/chase movie. Imagine the fear in knowing that the most powerful person in the nation wants you and/or your child dead--how freaky would that be? Unfortunately, even from the teaser trailer, this looked like another excercise in traditional piety.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Nice Review...

    by Sean38

    ...except that you ripped off the myrrh bit from Family Guy.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:23 a.m. CST


    by Losteroo

    Yeah I thought the myrrh joke sounded familiar

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:29 a.m. CST


    by KoozyK

    now that's what I call a review. the terminator reference was brilliant (i'm mad it didn't occur to me until now...).

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:30 a.m. CST


    by godric

    Um, the Ewoks didn't speak English in either Ewok movie. I don't know if you were being fecetious, but if you weren't, you memory has served you somehow incorrectly. Sorry.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST

    Life of Brian's still my favourite interpretation...

    by KillaKane

    of the Nativity, albeit a somewhat irreverent take. BTW nice review Massawyrm, had me some chuckles there.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Anti-Christian filth

    by homer40

    So I guess that since I believe the "reason for the season" of Christmas is to celebrate the birth of Jesus, I somehow don't have your keen ability to tell a good film from a bad. Frankly, you concern that the film is not in the native langauage of the characters is more than perposterous, as, before Passion, there really wasn't any history of films made in dead languages, you know, because the languages are dead and all. Passion wasn't even the best film made about Christ, that was Scorsese's brillant "The Last Temptation of Christ", which was in english. In the form of an SAT question and answer: Saving Private Ryan is to The Thin Red Line as The Passion of the Christ is to The Last Temptation of Christ. I think Spartacus (in english) was pretty good, as was Dr. Zivago (sp? in English), as was the great Jesus of Nazareth. BTW, you probably shouldn't strive for a place in hell too much, it definitely sucks there, and its likely pretty difficult to go unless that's what you want.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST

    I guess there´s no pinguins in this one.

    by artgutser

    So its probably safe to take your children

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Christian bashing aside...

    by Inframan76

    I don't even want to see this. The trailer made it look like a Lifetime movie. Toning down the Christian elements so as not to cause contoversy and making it about the strength of one woman fighting to protect her child. Hollywood's "brave" enough to make unflinching films about gay cowboys and the brutal reality of war but a Jesus movie sends 'em running scared every time.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Massawyrm, did you just pull a 'Vern'?

    by PoweredUpPacman

    That was a pretty funny review. "I know, I know, I know. I know what you’re thinking. I liked this story a lot better when it was called The Terminator", I nearly pissed my pants there...

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:06 a.m. CST

    I've read Vern's reviews

    by TheBaxter

    I know Vern. Vern is a friend of mine. Massawyrm, you're no Vern.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Massawyrm aka Vern

    by stones_throw

    Though I for one would like to see an R-rated version of the Nativity story. And I am not Christian.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:12 a.m. CST

    Nice Graphic

    by Almost_Human

    That is all.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:15 a.m. CST

    Pretty shoddy attempt at being Vern

    by Lemming


  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:21 a.m. CST

    Captain Mal

    by Aslans Chewing Gum

    I agree with you, this had great potential. I'm also disappointed to hear there is little attention given to the whole "child out of wedlock" part of the story, which would have been a huge scandal in this culture, for both Mary and Joseph. I'm a christian in full-time ministry and I'm not even that interested in seeing this movie. Maybe someone will do an "edgier" take in the future.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Linus' recitation of the Christmas story

    by damagedinc

    Linus going up to the stage to give the real meaning of Christmas is for me the most honest presentation of the Gospel that I've ever seen in film or tv. it's just a kid and it's just the Gospel and it speaks volume. I'm working on my master's degree in theology and it still gets me every time.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Who is this Jesus person?

    by Billyeveryteen

    And why is he so great?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:52 a.m. CST

    Caviezal was too busy attacking michael jfox to play

    by wolvenom

    christ this time. Reminding everyone he played jesus and that stem cell research is the path to CLONING!!!!!!!!!! CLONING!!!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH THE 6th day is going to become a reality two arnolds!!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:53 a.m. CST

    This is a shame

    by Franklin T Marmoset

    There are some pretty entertaining stories in the bible, so it's disappointing to hear this is another worthy but dull entry. Crazy Mel got it right with his Jesus whipping film. That guy went all out to make an entertaining Jesus film, not a slow and reverent one.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:58 a.m. CST

    They need to do big budget Noah's Ark movie...

    by wolvenom

    And have something controversial like two gay giraffes and him struggling with his conciense whether he should bring them or not.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:04 a.m. CST


    by Massawyrm 1

    Dude, then they just need to tell the REAL story. The gay animals in question were Unicorns, the gayest of all creatures. Gee, look around. I wonder if Noah brought them.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Wolvenom, there is a Noah's Ark film

    by McBane

    It's the sequel to Bruce Almighty, Evan Almighty

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Huh? how do you figure?

    by Joeyj1220

    Inframan76 said "Toning down the Christian elements so as not to cause contoversy and making it about the strength of one woman fighting to protect her child. Hollywood's "brave" enough to make unflinching films about gay cowboys and the brutal reality of war but a Jesus movie sends 'em running scared every time." WTF? The movie is ABOUT the birth of Jesus... hence the title "The Nativity Story", Jesus, you cant get more explicitly Christian than that... how is it toning down? Nice try. Loved the homophobic jab you slip in there

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    They are coming out w/ a Noah's Ark movie . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . called Evan Almighty. And no thanks to The Nativity Story. I'll just watch my annual triple feature of Charlie Brown (yep, Linus says it all), Emmit Otter, & A Christmas Story.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:21 a.m. CST

    He brought them...

    by Inframan76

    and then they realized artificial insemination hadn't been invented yet.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:22 a.m. CST

    Good review, Massawyrm, but it does seem Vern-ish.

    by eraser_x

    I guess now every AICN'er will try to write like Vern. Just like all the Sports Illustrated columnists suddenly started writing like Bill Simmons, the Sports Guy, several years ago, and just like Leno suddenly started stealing bunches of ideas from Letterman many years ago. I guess Vern is in good company, and Massawyrm is in the other kind of company.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Hell yeah Marmot -

    by Massawyrm 1

    Jugband Christmas rules.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Eraser - no worries

    by Massawyrm 1

    It was a humor style appropriate for the joke I wanted to tell. I have no intention of altering my writing style to that of the first 5 paragraphs of this piece. I just thought the joke was particularly funny - and it let me get most of the humor out of the way before the meat of the review.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:32 a.m. CST


    by Inframan76

    Homophobe is just a word gay people use to intimidate people that make them mad. My point is, even the Passion took out that "let his death be on your heads" line because it was deemed too controversial. When you make a movie about Jesus you automatically invite controversy, that's a given. Either take the complaints and keep going or don't do it at all. Just because it's got Jesus in it doesn't mean it's true to the story.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:34 a.m. CST

    what's with the Vern suckin?!

    by Argentino

    Is he only person in the world entitled to write a fucking joke in a movie review? Massa writes a funny review (btw shameless Family Guy rip off) and suddenly he's a Vern wanna be? Let the guy be funny and don't make unnecesary comparisions

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Re: "The Reason for the Season"

    by Dmann

    It's funny to me. Because getting pissy that we as a nation or society or whatever aren't respecting the celebration of Jesus birth, is kind of...contradictory to the actual message of Christ. It's just another point the extremist fundamentalists jam down our throats to prove how much better Christians they are than all us non funamentalist christians and especially all the non christians.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:39 a.m. CST


    by Massawyrm 1

    Sorry about that. I don't watch family guy. At all. So knowing that it looks like I ripped of McFarlane hurts in so many ways. But the wiseman really does give that look. It's quite funny.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:38 a.m. CST

    Re: "The Reason of the Christ Season."

    by Nodwick

    Every time I see people get their knickers in a twist about how Christmas should be celebrated religiously, I ask them two questions: 1. Where in the bible does it give a date for Jesus' birth? 2. Where does he command that it be celebrated and how?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Good point, Argentino

    by eraser_x

    The thing is, it's hard to tell at first whether someone is just naturally making a joke or whether a trend of style-stealing is starting. If you read the Sports Illustrated site you will know how awful it is when seemingly every columnist on a site suddenly tries to copy the star columnist. That type of emulation is just HORRIBLE and cringe-y to read. So, it's worth sounding an alarm, just in case a bad trend is about to start.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:42 a.m. CST

    I'm also rather not interested in the film...

    by Johnno

    Of course if they paid attantion to teh cultural elements at the time the scandal surrounding unwed pregnancy, and spent some time explaining and setting up the era and mood, maybe even on how this all relates to prophecy and purpose in the Jewish Scriptures, then this could have been a very enlightening and educational film. I think dead langauges are the way to go now, it'll also help literacy.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:45 a.m. CST

    But the very painfullest-to-hear emulation is by

    by eraser_x

    morning DJ's everywhere who try to copy Howard Stern, and their hyena-laughing Robin soundalikes. Every time I drive in another U.S. city, I will find a fingernails-on-chalkboard Howard Stern wannabe. Yuck! Massawyrm is a good writer, though, so his article didn't bother me much.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:45 a.m. CST

    Fair review, graphic unnecessary

    by SingingHatchet

    Movie review was fair, but your graphic was not. Your anti-Christian bigotry is sick. Why don't you make a graphic that mocks Islam? Why don't you go to Iran and mock Muhammad like you do Christ? Or go to Hollywood and make some anti-Semitic comment?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Oh yeah

    by SingingHatchet

    Darn you, Michael Bay

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:49 a.m. CST


    by steele8280

    Actually, last time I checked the "let his death be on your heads" line was still in the movie... it just wasn't translated (or subtitled rather!)... good ol Mel. Besides, This was a funny as hell reviews, and even though I am a Christian (and a believing one too!) I think that the most intereting part about the nativity story is the "out of wedlock" aspect of Mary and Joseph's relationship... especially from a contemporary point of view. Too bad it doesn't get much time. I think Robin Williams said it best in his 2002 stand up show: Joseph - You're pregnant? Mary - Oh, but it's immaculate, Joe. Joseph - It better be immaculate, Mary!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:51 a.m. CST

    "Christians? We make pretty shitty movies"

    by triplefive

    Amen to that. Just about everything creative done by Christians has been bland and boring...except, paradoxically, Christian metal. XLivingXSacrificeX, beotches!!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Joshua > Jesus

    by DewMan

    Wasn't his name Joshua and only became Jesus from the Greek interpretation? So the whole " will name him Jesus..." thing doesn't really work.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:54 a.m. CST


    by Massawyrm 1

    This was one of over 3 dozen contest entries for my new avatar (which Harry ultimately decided he didn't like any of - so I'm going to cycle through review appropriate avatars.) I made mention and fully expected at least one Islam avatar. No one sent one in. That's why I won't post one.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Massawyrm's trying too hard...

    by Hail

    ...After reading his FEET and NATIVITY reviews, it's clarily apparent this guy aims to push buttons rather than deliver an insightful review. For the simple fact that he's taking ho-hum movies and attaching paper-thin analogies by mere threads is just boring. What's next? Saying that the UNACCOMPANIED MINORS is actually a porely made alegory about Roosevelt's New Deal? You're trying to hard to stir the pot, buddy. Calm down because your shtick is getting

  • Nov. 29, 2006, noon CST

    if there's anything worst than taking a joke from FG...

    by Argentino

    its' to not watch FG at all. Just kidding, Massa. However you should watch it, great show. Anyway, eraser_x, we don't get Sport Illustrated in Argentina (as far as I know) but I undestand your concern. No big deal. I just like humor in my reviews, specially if the joke serves to prove a point, and the first half of this review was hilarius.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Passion "raised the bar"?

    by PwnedByStallone

    Don't you mean cross? Seriously that overhyped medieval snuff film was universally panned by critics. I can't comment on its quality myself as I have no interest in seeing Mad Max's take on the Bible. And as for this film, almost everyone knows that it's bullshit just based on the content. I mean the whole doctrine of Christian faith is based on Mary supposedly being a "virgin" and consequently Jesus being immacualtely conceived. Hate to break it to you but the actual Hebrew word used in the Torah was mistranslated as "virgin" into Greek when it really more closely meant "young woman." So Masssawyrm, and the rest of you misguided individuals living in the dark ages, your entire religion is based on something akin to a typo. Now, the rest of us would all appreciate it if you would stop overpopulating the planet, denying people who love each other to be married, starting holy wars, and preventing diseases from being cured while you wait for the end of the world. mmmmkay?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Vern's been replaced by a killer robot

    by ookla the mok

    Have you read the last five Vern reviews? They long ago stopped being "Vernalicious." His last was OK but Massa crucifies it with this one. I thought "Hey, Terminator already did this" just before I got to the Terminator paragraph. Well done, fellow Christian!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:13 p.m. CST

    Harry didn't like any of those new avatars?

    by jrbarker

    That is bullshit. Some of those were really great.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Massawyrm ...

    by Freefinger

    ... yop're as worst as Kramer with that little Cross... So there you go.. Take your shitty reviews which never seem to be about a movie, 'cause you alway need to get way too much under the whole concept and get some stupid rant about religion, sex, or whatever else you never get 'cause of your little shitty attitude. You know what... If you can't enjoy a movie for what it is, then get a penguin and stick it up your ass... Guess Harry and the gang missed the fact that you can't deliver anything good out of a movie without stirring shit up. They should just stop letting you in this site since you can't deliver actual reviews.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:28 p.m. CST

    godric: Yes they did

    by Gil Brooks

    Wicket: "Space cruiser- CRASH!" Nuff said.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:53 p.m. CST

    The Da Vinci Code is more believeable!

    by performingmonkey

    Pity the Da Vinci Code movie was so SO bad and they didn't DARE delve into a lot of the Church stuff in the book, not to mention the fact that they fucked up the ending. Still, Brown's take on things (well, not just his take but this sort of take) should maybe be taken as a modern basis for the Christian religion(!) instead of the delusional bullshit. In Angels and Demons (coming to a theater near you sometime in the future, hopefully with better script and direction than the Da Crapci Code) he discusses the coming together of science and knowledge with religion, which is something all the religious nutboys out there could probably do with listening to (it's not Scientology, by the way, it's just a more modern realistic way of thinking). Ohhhhh...sorry, I forgot! The Powers That Be LIKE to use crazy belief systems to control the people and prove that war and extreme prejudice are 'just'!! Religion is the most powerful tool available. Suicide bombers believe they are going to be rewarded in the afterlife for their deeds. Christians believe that their God will forgive them no matter what the fuck they have done in their lives (maybe not what it says in the Bible (or is it? that book is so fucking contradictory) but it's what a priest will tell you), all the Christian murderers and adulterers out there think they're still going to their heaven, so where the frak is the line drawn between right and wrong? Organized religion is bullshit. Brown's books are just as fictional as the story presented here and in The Passion. Although I suppose neither are as fictional as the official account of 9/11. And why do you think the government know they can spin any fucking yarn they want and the majority of people will take it in? Because they've already BEEN brainwashed with bullshit all their lives so what's a little more????? BWAHAHA!! Now...'bout that Seinfeld reunion...

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Massywrm the ANTI SEMITE?

    by captain_kirk

    I find it despicable that Massywrm refers to "deserving deaths awaiting the Jews from the first film". Without any hint of irony or objection, MASSYWRM rehases the antisemitic thread of the Passion of the Christ. Get a life.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 12:55 p.m. CST

    minor correction, it's the ESPN website that has all

    by eraser_x

    the Bill Simmons emulators.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:03 p.m. CST


    by teddanson37

    stop hatin'. if you think a "typo" can bring the largest established religion in the world down you are wrong. you are obviously not a person of faith, because if so you would understand that faith isn't brought down by biased half-thought out ideas. when will you guys get it? stop hatin' on the christians. i know alot of them hated on you first. but some of us don't hate on anyone. so don't attack the christian community as a whole just cuz you have a chip on your shoulder and want to feel better about your belief that there is no god, the world came out of no where, there are no such things as morals, people should be able to do whatever they want and never feel any guilt or shame, any war you disagree with is automatically started by christians for anti-non-christian reasons, and you have a right to play god and of course the world as we know it is will be here forever and after death is nothing. ok. now i'm hatin'. sorry, bro.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Captain Kirk - no hint of Irony?

    by Massawyrm 1

    Did you not read the second half of that sentence? The part where I joke about that being the film Gibson wants to make? That sentence was meant to be ENTIRELY ironic.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:04 p.m. CST

    The reason for the season...

    by Bunger!

    ... is a primordial pagan dread of cold, darkness, and death, which are brought to stinging proximity to all mankind at the time of the winter solstice (particularly in the northern European climes, from whence most of our Christmas traditions are derived). In response, mankind-- well prior to the imposition of christianity, mind you-- developed all manner of celebrations of food, warmth, and light as a psychological foil to these oppressive seasonal fears. Christianity, being a parasitic and manipulative psycho-political institution, has co-opted the pagan traditions of trees, lights, feasts, etc in an effort to undermine the fundamental human need for midwinter comfort. The churches then have the audacity to say that they are the reason for the holiday-- but not so!! They are merely the reason it is named Christmas and the reason that we are forced to listen to songs about angels and little babies and virgins for two months a year. Frankly, the season would be far more festive without these downers. In sum, Jesus isn't the reason for the season-- he's the reason the season is so much less fun than it should be! Bunger out!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Thanks, perfoming Monkey and AK-47

    by theBigE

    You are so enlightening - thanks for so simply pointing out the errors in all forms of Christian thought. You guys have clearly pointed out things years of theologians have obviously missed. <p> Oh, and AK-47, I guess Mel Gibson was wrong about the Jews causing all the wars. It's obvious all of the world's problems are the blame of Christians. Thanks for sharing your hate. <p> Good review, Massawyrm. Unfortunately, the movie sounds as if it's the way I feared it would be.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:05 p.m. CST


    by captain_kirk

    I would like to personally offer my apology to Massywrm. It appears that I misread a few lines in his article and GROSSLY misread his meaning. Please accept my honest apology. It was a knee jerk reaction, and I don't want to unfairly chastise you. Thank you, and apologies again.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:09 p.m. CST


    by Bunger!

    ... I just proofread, and must acknowledge that I misstated something. The churches didn't coopt the solstice in an effort to UNDERMINE a human need for the midwinter feast, but in an effort to EXPLOIT it for its own ends, as if to CLEANSE it of it's primordial (and far FAR more important) roots in the fundamental human experience of being alive on Earth.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Thanks, theBigE, for being big about it...

    by Bunger!

    ... wish more of your ilk were willing to allow the scales to fall from your eyes and see the folly of your ways. Cheers!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:14 p.m. CST

    No problem Kirk -

    by Massawyrm 1

    Everyone's allowed a little internet knee jerk every now and again. We're still cool.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:16 p.m. CST

    For everyone gagging on Vern's cock

    by Fabulous Freak

    Take it out of your mouth and slap yourself with it. Wyrm's reviews have always been somewhat tongue in cheek.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:22 p.m. CST


    by ATARI

    This is what I have been trying to tell my friends and coworkers for years. Some get it, most do not. I guess ignorance is bliss. And of course it's just coincidence that the Christian holiday of rebirth (aka Easter) is right around the spring equinox when the land begins to 'rebirth'. These celebrations have existed for thousands of years before the Christians co-opted them for their own purposes.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Ewoks, co-opting holidays...

    by godric

    Well, if you count the "Star Cruiser" part--they'd learned English from that family. But most of the time they talked Ewok. Also, being a Christian myself, I'm not scared to admit that, yes, the dates of many of our holidays were chosen in order to sort of overtake pagan holidays without canceling them. It's historical fact. what? from a formal logic standpoint, that neither proves nor disproves anything about the validity of Christianity.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:49 p.m. CST


    by Bloo

    As a (I mentioned in a, I think Jesus Camp movie review, born again pentecostal) Christain, I was really looking forward to this. I'll still go see it but with lessened expectations. Glad to hear Dr. Bashiar is still working and doing a good job, I had always wondered what had happened to him. I too was hoping that it would be, not graphic but at least more honest, you know the whole part about herod killing babies in that area was even fullfillment of prophesy as well as Mary and Joseph going to Egypt. Speaking of which has anyone read Anne Rice's "The Child Jesus" or whatever it's called, I've been hesitant in reading in because of it's reliance on aphroycal gospels? No offense from me on the avatar Massa, I know you mean no harm. <p>oh real quick PS, everyone should read the book "Righteous" interesting look at the Christian culture</p>

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 1:57 p.m. CST

    No, godric, the complete lack of evidence...

    by Some Dude

    ...for any religious or supernatural claim coupled with a bible full of contradictions, anachronisms and weirdness disproves the validity of Christianity.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Some Dude

    by Bloo

    now I will grant you there is little, if no, evidence for the supernatural things, some things we christians do accept by faith, but can you point me to some contridictions in the Bible?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:10 p.m. CST

    Not "hatin' on Christianity

    by PwnedByStallone

    Well, yes, I am. I'm actually hating on ALL religion. So for all of you sensitive Christians out there let me make that perfectly clear. Let me also state that Islam is about 10 times worse, in terms of violence, miltarism, and suppression of thought, freedom, and "nonbelievers." and teddanson, man I could be here all day dealing with your complete ignorance, bu8t let me just say that it's quite possible to have morals, contol one's behavior, and feel shame or guilt without Christianity or religion in general. To live an ethical life requires nothing more than a modacum of empathy and a respect for the happiness and well-being of others. You don't need God for that. And just think how the world myight change for the btter if we weren't expecting something better in and afterlife.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Good one, Don

    by Badger999

    Damn you Don Murphy!<br> <br> Sorry. I had to.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:21 p.m. CST

    thank you godric

    by mattthebat

    its ridiculous the amount of people trying to prove that christianity has flaws and faults and that its filled with crazy wackos. any religion you find will have crazies and wackos. wait...hang on a sec...ive got better things to do than argue faith on an f-ing talkback about a movie

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:24 p.m. CST

    God = morals?

    by Billyeveryteen

    News to me.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:25 p.m. CST

    ATARI and AK-47 and SomeDude

    by Bunger!

    ATARI: I wish all christians would take the Jehovah's Witness approach and celebrate NO holidays whatsoever (they do observe Easter, but not as a "celebration" with the eggs and fun nature/pagan stuff). That way they wouldn't cloud the waters of the calendar with their dreck, and we could enjoy the seasonal observances for what they ought to be. AK-47: you are right, religion sucks and is generally more of an obstacle to good rational ethics than anything else. SomeDude: Ha ha ha!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:32 p.m. CST

    George Bush will love this movie...

    by Cruel_Kingdom

    "Finally, a Jesus movie that's in English!" Cause after all, that's what they spoke in ancient Bethlehem, right? I'm surprised all the leads aren't blonde and blue eyed...

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Jesus versus killer robots from the future.

    by Uncapie

    I'd watch that.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:39 p.m. CST


    by Bloo

    thanks for the clear and well reasoned response. I u nderstand your point and your right people can live clean, good and moral lives without being a Christaian. That's not really the Christian propistion. The reason we live clean, pure and moral lives is so that we will honor the God who has "redemmed" us, if you will. Moral living is the fruit of our salvation, not the cause of our salvation

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:46 p.m. CST

    Many valid points but...

    by hulk_beanpoll

    You lost me when you criticised it for being spoken in English. True, that makes it different from The Passion. It also makes it the same as every other movie ever shot in/for the english speaking world. Do you have trouble enjoying Gladiator now because its in English? Or any other movie where it isnt historically accurate. I can appreciate that you took time to compare it to The Passion but also talked about it as a movie in its own right. But of all the things you could have called it on, that's just silly.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:51 p.m. CST

    A God, by any name

    by Almost_Human

    is by definition outside the constraints of the physical universe. Nothing about them can be proven, that is why it is called BELIEF. To make decisions based on belief instead of empirical evidence is usually the wrong thing to do. AK is a bit narrow minded about the value of religion to teach ethics and it's value as a psychological safety net for the weak mined, people in crisis, etc. but he does point out quite validly that if humans spent more time working on making the world a better place NOW instead of depending on a better life after death, WE WOULD ALL BE IN BETTER SHAPE. That is why I chose the Buddhist PHILOSOPHY (not RELIGION). The 8 Fold Path as described by Buddha is not about some nebulous afterlife, but about reducing suffering in the REAL WORLD, RIGHT NOW. It has direct practical application. Belief? I suppose I am an Aristotelian. Aristotle had the concept of a Prime Mover. A force that underlies all and put things in motion. Call it God, Yahweh, Shiva, Hrothgar Stonebender, whatever, your choice in NAME is no better than anyone else's and to a one all of your religious texts were written by MEN. Surely if a God talks, it would be in inexplicable mathematics. It is also the height of hubris to look at the vast grandeur of the universe and think a god would focus specifically on humans yet alone spend a significant amount of time directly holding our hands. And given the nature of a god, any man who claims to have the market cornered on what a god thinks or wants from you is full of crap and probably trying to manipulate you for some reason either political or financial. ALL RELIGIONS need to adopt this one simple rule: Tolerance unless your life is endangered by tolerance. I would have just said tolerance, but let us be honest about human nature - survival trumps all. Given this, how about less worry about the afterlife and more concern about the current life? Just an idea.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:55 p.m. CST

    Easter (ATARI)...

    by Bunger!

    ... I do need to defend the xtians SOMEWHAT as to the independent basis for the timing of Easter. Recall that Easter marks the date of the (mythological) resurrection three days after the (probably historically true) crucifiction of Jesus.... Recall that that happened during the passover holiday in Jerusalem.... Passover is always held at the same time of the lunar calendar... So Easter isn't strictly where it is in the calendar in order to coopt the Spring Solstice-- that is, actually, just a coincidence (but one the jesus pumpers definitely exploit to the max!)

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Before this ...

    by Almost_Human

    I practiced Carlinism. I worshiped the Sun and prayed to Joe Pesce.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:11 p.m. CST


    by aRTCy

    The translation of virgin also has been used as "sexually pure woman." The context will usually point out the correct usage.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Well, Everett, since you asked so nicely...

    by Some Dude It will blow your mind.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:20 p.m. CST

    You guys said it re: Charlie Brown Christmas.

    by DarthCorleone

    I'm decidedly un-Christian, and that show hits me in the gut everytime. Linus rules. Oh, and I'd rather watch A Charlie Brown Christmas back-to-back 100 times than see The Nativity Story once.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:27 p.m. CST

    Some Dude, So will this...

    by aRTCy

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Mary is hot in this movie

    by Uncle_Les

    There, I said it. Peace Out.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:36 p.m. CST

    blessed testicles

    by johnnyfavourite

    why haveone turd when you can have two?!! couple this turd with an actual "free and you can fashion it into a crucifix?", piece of shit that is thrown at you once you start watching this?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:38 p.m. CST

    aRTCy, you poor deluded fool....

    by Bunger!

    the site you cite actually contains propositions like this: "However, there are viable and intellectually plausible answers to every supposed Bible contradiction and error." That's complete sophistry and you know it (unless you are unwilling to think critically). The cite you cite tries to explain away the discrepencies, brutalities, and such in the Bible by saying that god "breathed his word into an ancient culture" and that therefore the seeming problems (endorsing slavery and inhumane treatment of women and other cultures, for example) are all about context-- but in the same page the site still tries to say that the absolutist biblical line on things like homosexuality and marriage are just absolutely true (and guided-- get this!!-- by LOVE AND COMPASSION!! HARHARHAR!!).... That kind of illogical and self-serving rhetorical cherry-picking loses my sympathy and respect every time... YER A CHUMP, CHUMP!!! FLAME ON!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:47 p.m. CST


    by aRTCy

    Your right, I haven't really looked at the site. There is a book that explains very clearly why the bible is truth if you have an open mind.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:50 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    i feel compelled to write that, not being a regular contributor to these flagrantly aggressive american talkbacks that Moriarty's reviews, comments & such are some of the most mature words i have read on this site. The majority of ye should ask your mothers for an extra hug when ye go to bed. Ye are regularly hostile towards each other over very simple things and it is rather depressing to read. My own fault, i know for reading, but jesus, get a grip. There is more to anything.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:55 p.m. CST

    aRTCy, but there are plenty of books...

    by Some Dude

    ...that explain why your bible is so silly and full of lies. Try reading one of those and then rejoin the debate.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:57 p.m. CST

    Some Dude thanks

    by Bloo

    for the link I'll be sure to check it out, would you be willing to check out a coule of books, I recommend Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ and the Case for Faith. He was a Chiago Times (or Tribune, not sure)award winning journalist and educated lawyer (ale, Princetion, Columbia, something like that) Those 2 books document his own investigation into the claims of Jesus and contridictions, accuarc of the Bible, basis for faith, etc. He's also written one on intelligent desgin, it was a heavy read for me, called the Case for the Creator and one specifically on Christmas called The Case for Christmas. <P> And in the meantime, while we are checking all this out, anyone care to discuss what is the worst made "Christian" movie out there? I really want to say The Cross and The Switchblade, it tries hard to be a 70's gang movie but just falls in a lot of was, good STORY but production and everything have a lot to be desired, even by 1970s standards, discuss</p><p> oh and regarding Linusa everone, I have to say BEST...CHRISTMAS SPEECH...EVER

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 3:58 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    === “Homophobe is just a word gay people use to intimidate people that make them mad”. === That’s funny. I thought a homophobe was a gay person who can’t come to terms with their own sexuality and thus violently hates anything that reminds them of just how gay they are – kind of like radio man Michael Savage.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:02 p.m. CST

    johnnyfavourite and aRTCy

    by Bunger!

    ... johnny, let's leave jesus out of this, ok? taking the lord's name in vain is so very, very offensive..........and aRTCy, any book that "explains very clearly why the bible is truth" is clearly bunko; tellingly, the only positive reviews I can find (in fact the only reviews I can find PERIOD) are delivered by people who were already into the whole jesus thing... in otherwords, no conversion stories, just more of the same tired "if you squint just right and ignore this and that anachronism and presuppose these things and disregard the rest then it all makes sense" dross... ppppft.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:01 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    === ”Christianity, being a parasitic and manipulative psycho-political institution, has co-opted the pagan traditions of trees, lights, feasts, etc in an effort to undermine the fundamental human need for midwinter comfort.” === Christianity did not co-opt pagan festivals to undermine anything. They did it because they wanted to spread their influence to a largely scattered and formally uneducated population that had little access to information – hence “The Dark Ages”. It was easier to coincide the Christian holidays with Pagan traditions that the population was already familiar with rather than try to reinvent the wheel from scratch. There was no ill intent involved – quite the opposite in fact. It certainly facilitated the growth of Christianity but that’s hardly exploitation as you later corrected your point to. Now whether the spread of Christianity was good or bad is an entirely different point but why Christian holidays fall on Pagan holidays is not up for debate. And most Christians that I know are well aware that holidays like Christmas do fall on arbitrary dates. It’s what they stand for that is important to them, not whether they are historically accurate to the day.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:01 p.m. CST

    sounds tiiiight!

    by thrillkillbill

    sounds tiiiight!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:03 p.m. CST

    I am familiar with Strobel.

    by Some Dude

    He is a huckster of the highest order. His books do not work and as such are easily refuted by anyone with a modicum of critical thinking. Find a dozen of his best arguments and they will fall within minutes to anyone schooled in debate.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:07 p.m. CST

    PS Strobel's credentials in law and journalism...

    by Some Dude

    ...indicate nothing of his ability to understand the scientific method. We do not appeal to improper authority. You should read books by scientists in appropriate fields. Behe does not count (especially given his hilariously awful perfomance in his last court appearance, where he actually concedes to not have evidence for his position).

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:10 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    mocky_puppet, it does me no harm and whole lot of pride to simply tell you that i am now sitting at my desk on the south douglas road, cork, ireland. Bunger! There is no god and never has been. Give yourself and the human spirit some credit. Otherwise take it outside.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by aRTCy

    Yeah, I get the point. Your smarter than me and those who've come before you. Very well, I yield.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:14 p.m. CST


    by Bunger!

    You said: "Christianity did not co-opt pagan festivals to [exploit] anything. They did it because they wanted to spread their influence to a largely scattered and formally uneducated population that had little access to information – hence “The Dark Ages”. It was easier to coincide the Christian holidays with Pagan traditions that the population was already familiar with rather than try to reinvent the wheel from scratch. There was no ill intent involved – quite the opposite in fact. It certainly facilitated the growth of Christianity but that’s hardly exploitation "... um, exploitation is defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as "1 The act of employing to the greatest possible advantage".... I return to your post: "It was easier to coincide the Christian holidays with Pagan traditions that the population was already familiar with rather than try to reinvent the wheel from scratch." Aren't you saying that christianity was utilizing the prevailing holiday calendar and culture to its maximum advantage? That's exploitation baby! Trying to drain the marrow of the existing culture and religion and inmpose, instead, the christian paradigm.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:15 p.m. CST

    aRTCy, don't give up!

    by Some Dude

    You could read more about science and history and catch up. That's the great thing about basing one's views on evidence rather than faith and revelation. No one is better or worse, just more or less ignorant.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    puppet! stupid, ignorant, souless and blind. It is people like you and your blind ignorance that have made people wary of their neighbours and have created tension and ultimately violence amongst your fellow man! You shouldn't need some kind of creed to recognise the difference between right and wrong, you dope. This world will be brought to its knees because of people like you, of whom, scaringly there are countless millions. Dog help us all.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST

    johnnyfavourite and aRTCy (again!)

    by Bunger!

    Johnny: I agree with you about the whole "there is no god" thing (with a little "g" no less!). I credit myself and the human spirit to the max, man!! you got me all wrong... aRTCy: hope you don't take it too hard, and I must modestly decline the title of world's most enlightened. Plenty of others are far more enlightened than me (just not the jesus campers, at least with regard to theology!)

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:23 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    You got me on that one. Damn dictionary =). I am referring more to the negative pretext of your claim – mainly “Trying to drain the marrow of the existing culture and religion and impose, instead, the Christian paradigm.” I was simply making the point that Christianity was not malicious during the Middle Ages when co-opting Pagan holidays (notice that I didn’t say that Christianity was not malicious at all – it certainly was at times). But Christianity did nothing more to Pagan religions that what other religions had been doing to each other for thousands of years before, dating back to the earliest recorded human history and moon/goddess worship. It borrowed familiar elements in an effort to spread its influence among the local populations by using something they would already understand. There is nothing inherently evil about that and it wasn’t even done with an eye towards destroying Pagan traditions (that did happen but it came several hundred years later). In fact it incorporated those traditions and helped keep them alive. The dominant religions of today are quite amalgamated and bear far more striking similarities to those of the past that most people are willing to admit.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:27 p.m. CST

    ummm.... Johnny?

    by Bunger!

    I think you have me confused with the religious zealots out there, n'est pas? If you reread my posts, you may see that I don't feel I do need a creed to recognize right from wrong-- far from it! I'm a Socratic skeptical rational humanist dude! Unless you think I am somehow orthodox in my atheism, which I'm not... I am, however, a strident American opinion-nazi!! So you got that right!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:30 p.m. CST


    by Bunger!

    thx for the acknowledgment. I do, however, see a fair amount of malice in the Dark Ages christian practices... fact is they killed cultures in doing the things they did. I realize that they (and you, evidently) thought it was in the best interests of the people they were enlightening, but fact is they had to enforce the changes through militarism, book burning, and violence. Malice is in the eye of the 'witch' being burned at the stake.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:32 p.m. CST


    by AllieJamison

    CHILDREN OF MEN for me (as a Christian) was a great (maybe accidental) interpretation and translation of Jesus' birth in our time. Yeah, Children Of Men played in the future and it mostly focused on different things than the biblical story of Jesus' birth did. Still for me it was great to see it in the light of the biblical story. However, The Nativity Story was as it seems written by the guy who wrote MANHUNT, the next Harrison Ford pic. It better be good.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:36 p.m. CST


    by Doc_Strange

    I really hate that song. Thank God for the SE.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST

    They should do "Genesis" with full frontal nudity...

    by Flim Springfield

    I mean, if "The Passion" can make graphic violence "okay", let's see Adam and Eve do the same for full-on nakedness. For no other reason than I enjoy the smell of hypocrisy.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:35 p.m. CST

    AllieJamison: Right on. The similarities are striking.

    by Some Dude

    Children of Men, like the Nativity story, is inspired by the story of Mithras. All three are also works of fiction.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Flim Springfield: They did back in 99.

    by Some Dude

    The Loss of Sexual Innocence

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:38 p.m. CST

    I answered Flim's question before it was asked...

    by Some Dude

    ...maybe there is something to this magical shit after all.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:42 p.m. CST


    by PwnedByStallone

    yuo got to be shitting me? What the fuck is Harrison Ford's malfunction? Just the title is boring and overplayed. And what the hell is it about? Is he going to be the hunted ala The Fugitive? Or will he the hunter and search every henhouse, farmhouse, used to be beautiful Harrison.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:42 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    Actually, I am arguing a match narrower point (the coincidence of Christian and Pagan holidays). I am not Christian myself and I absolutely do not defend the conduct of a very corrupt, greedy, and power-hungry Christian Church as an institution during medieval times. However, the early Church was quite different from the controlling political institution that it later grew into and that subsequently carried out any number of shameless acts like running The Inquisition. There were even a few positives to be found (hard to believe I know) but at the time those holiday dates were set, the Church was in no position to be a domineering force in Europe and largely chose those days so as to “fit in” if you will with the existing population. It was hardly malicious and done far more out of convenience. I’m not denying the abject destruction of cultures and traditions but just saying that it came centuries later and was not the original intent for the timeline of Christian holidays.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:44 p.m. CST

    Unless I missed it, nobody mentioned...

    by BillyPilgrim

    Shohreh Aghdashloo is in this flick. Jebus save BEHROOOOOOOOZ!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:46 p.m. CST

    cookylamoo: M and J story favors cuckoldry.

    by Some Dude

    What a strange religion.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:59 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    I'm glad you recognise some part of your shadowy psyche.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 4:59 p.m. CST

    OK Some Dude...

    by aRTCy

    How about reading this. Clearly spells out scripture in conjunction with Scientific Fact.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 5:16 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    sorry dudes, drunk and after a bad funeral. sorry and sorry

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 5:20 p.m. CST

    aRTCy: Sorry, guy.

    by Some Dude

    That site is bogus. has a whole section devoted to the broken science in the bible.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 5:36 p.m. CST

    Ofcourse Some Dude...

    by aRTCy

    Man, I so predicted you'd say that!! That site of yours is bogus!! But since I believe that there is a God I'm always going to take the word of him over someone who he created. I guess we will see after you and I are gone from this world. Plus, this is why God gives us free will, so that he won't get blamed for our choices or in this case our beliefs. It's cool, man. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. One thing I do believe is that it takes more faith to believe in Evolution (which you might or might not believe in, I don't know) than in Creation. Because, none of us will ever have all the facts on either side. You can say I'm deluded into believing in crap. Fine, whatever. Let's just end this because neither one of us is going to convince the other because arguments like this have been going on since the beginning of time, right? It's pointless. Good day to you. Have a Happy Holiday next month!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 6:01 p.m. CST

    aRTCy: Don't be silly.

    by Some Dude

    It takes no faith to "believe" in evolution. Does it take faith to "believe" in gravity? Besides, assuming (just for fun) that there is a creator... what made it? Positing a creator answers nothing. Anyhow, when embarking on scholarly pursuits, one is well advised to leave "belief" at the door. If I found evidence of a deity, I would scrutinize it and, if it was real, have to accept it, even if it conflicted with my prior understanding of things. This is part of how science works. Your decision to reject my arguments or the arguments of others because we were allegedly created by a creator you believe in reveals the dearth of curiousity, integrity and intelligence on your side of the debate. It wouldn't matter what evidence we brought to you, since you will always fall back to your default setting. That is no way to win a debate. I hope you choke on a candy cane during your "holiday" before you infect any children's minds with this anti-intellectual twaddle.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 6:32 p.m. CST

    Manhunt is about the

    by AllieJamison

    Manhunt is about the assasination of Lincoln and the 12 day hunt for the murder. Just google it or "imdb" it... :)

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 6:53 p.m. CST

    TOO SOON!!

    by Pageiv

    2006 years!!!!!!!!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 6:55 p.m. CST


    by johnnyfavourite

    cunt. in ireland you ignorant american idiot savage, war-mongering prick. Fuck off and die. Does this mean Cork is going to be attacked? FUCKING WANKER!

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 7:45 p.m. CST

    For everyone praising Passion of the Christ WHY??!!

    by Lovecraftfan

    Its a two hour snuff film althougha very very pretty one at that. If you didnt know anything about Christinaity then you would know nothing excpet that Jesus could take a whipping like no other and that Christians are obsessed gratitous gore. Any kind of "transcendent message" that Mass. somehow found gets completely lost among endless gore shots.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 7:55 p.m. CST

    Religious debates on AICN

    by theBigE

    I don't know why we get sucked into these. Both sides have their minds made up already. <p> As a Christian, however, I find these anti-religion posters particularly rabid and ill-informed. You dismiss all pro-Christian arguments with some of those "of course, all religious claims can be easily explained" viewpoints. Really? I've been to your pro-skeptic pro-atheist websites, and that's the best you've got? I've heard debates between both camps - not impressed, atheists. Dawkins, Harris? Not very convincing. Not sure why you guys are so filled with hate, but if you'd like the rest of the world to be just like you, you're not selling your message very well. Unfortunately, neither are lots of Christians.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:04 p.m. CST

    Passion of the crap

    by Pipple

    That's what it should be called. Whenever religious groups protest violent videogames and movies, I'm just going to show them the Passion.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Jesus Christ

    by SithMenace

    Superstar was the most realistic version. And the grooviest.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:20 p.m. CST

    brothers, sisters...

    by stickmangrit

    come together!!! can't we for once just refer to them as annoying mindless idiot fucks? but all Bill Hicks felating aside, The Passion fucking sucked. i made it twenty minutes. i watched it without subtitles(as Gibson originally intended before Dr. Dobbs sat his ass down and told him it would never fucking sell), so i got to sit there and watch people jabber at each other for what felt like a fucking eternity. i was bored to fucking tears and simply couldn't take any more. i'm sure the violence would have been a gratifying pay-off, but i can go see Saw and get that same fix without all the forced guilt. in summary> Passion is to Last Temptation what rancid syphilitic diahreah is to fillet mignon.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:30 p.m. CST

    it's not a snuff film

    by occula

    sorry, lovecraftfan, but in a snuff film, someone actually dies while being filmed. i wouldn't throw that term around lightly. on another note, does it give anybody else the retard tingles that the lead actress in this film, miss whale rider herself, is proudly pregnant at age 16?

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:45 p.m. CST

    Actually, I kind of agree.

    by Veraxus

    I don't mind them capitalizing on the success of The Passion (hell, we knew it was going to happen) - but at least do it right. Don't get squeemish about the content and do it in the original language. I don't plan on seeing this... ever... despite being raised in a Christian household. I happen to be a film snob first and foremost.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 8:47 p.m. CST

    Some Dude...about Strobel

    by Bloo

    have you read his books, because it's not actually him that is doing the defending. What he does is takes a journalists approach, he interviews experts, PHds, some with several PHds, in their various fileds, sience, pyscology, medicine, history, acrchology, etc, and asks them various questions. Of course Lee Strobel isn't an expert, his training isn't in those areas, but what he does is what a journalist, which he is, does. He interviews. Hope that didn't come across nasty, just clarifing things abit. I'm not real impressed iwth the website you keep throwing out, just saying

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:05 p.m. CST

    Not one mention of director Catherine Hardwicke?

    by Charles Grady

    Not one person has mentioned the curious fact that Nativity is directed by the aging Venice Beach wannabe skater-hag auteur Catherine Hardwick, who did THIRTEEN and LORDS OF DOGTOWN. Seems Massawyrm might've mentioned that bizarre disparity, which leads me to believe even further that this seems a pretty cynical cash-in on the Christian movie trend, rather than a personal work of faith, which, whatever their flaws, Gibson's and Scorsese's films no doubt were.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 9:13 p.m. CST

    whoa whoa whoa

    by Bloo

    The chick that did Thirteen directed this movie...that's almost as strange as the gay dude playing the missionary/martyer in End of the Spear

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:32 p.m. CST

    As someone has already pointed out.

    by streakerfreak1983

    So do you watch family guy much?! You tryed to play that off as your joke and because of that you just lost my respect. I actaully could not read it anymore. Man...I think I am going to go watch Family Guy now since I have to read a cheap knockoff of the jokes I might as well watch the real ones and actually laugh.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 10:41 p.m. CST

    Wait, Wait, Wait

    by streakerfreak1983

    Did you just say you don't watch family guy at all? That is a little wierd, because several of "your jokes" were from famliy guy right down to the t. There were to many in there to be just some random chance

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:12 p.m. CST

    oh well i really don't care anymore

    by streakerfreak1983

    at one point in my life I hated Christanity, then I "found" Christ when I dated this girl. Turns out he was on the potty the whole time. Now three years later I hate Christanity even more. I don't actauly hate Christanity just it's followers. I was one for a short time and man did it scare me even more. Talk about brain washing. The Catholic Church is even worse. My fiance was brought up Catholic. They really brain wash at a young age. I had to tell her things about her own religion that she did not even know. We then talked about it for a while and we came to the conlusion that at a young age they only tell you certain things so you will believe one way, then when you discover other parts of the religion later in life you will deducted a different meaning out of it. Geez, I don't think I am making anysense. I don't even know what I just said. I hate this new time zone I am in. A New Englander in Oregon. I should be asleep already.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:38 p.m. CST

    i'm tryingt o figure out...

    by v1cious

    how such an obviously religious person has such an blasphemous sig.

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:43 p.m. CST

    Alright ZombieSolutions

    by streakerfreak1983

    Alright, I think this is one of the first times I have ever agreed with you. I do believe anything is possible in this world, so any numorous beliefs could be true. That is what I believe. Anything is possible and every theory, every religion, every doctrine has holes in it and just makes me ask a question that I or no one else can answer so I can not believe in anything since there are no truths in this weird world of ours

  • Nov. 29, 2006, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Almost_Human . . .

    by Pallando

    Did you seriously write that people should spend time making the world a better place instead of spending time thinking about religion? You do realize that you are posting this on a website where the most intellectual convesation you will have is a debate of whether LOTR or Star Wars is better and whether or not Battlestar Galactica sucks? You realize this right? If all the losers that check this site daily (myself included) spent 10 minutes a day thinking about how to make the world a better place and then trying to do something about it, that would plenty of good as well. While I am ranting, if any of you Christian haters want to attack Catholic beliefs, peruse the Chatechism and you might find that you were wrong about where the Church's teachings. I know that actually doing a little research before making blanket generalizations goes against every fiber of your being, but hey give it a shot.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 12:18 a.m. CST

    Doctor Bashir...

    by CZ

    ... as the Angel Gabriel. My fangirl brain has had an aneurysm.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 1:14 a.m. CST

    That's so funny I just watched TBFE


    a couple days ago with my niece and nephew. My niece thought it was funny that Wicket never blinked.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 1:32 a.m. CST

    I'm not against religion or anything but

    by veritasses

    don't we already have enough books, radio shows, tv shows, cable networks, magazines, institutions, user groups, musicals, plays, songs, recordings, lectures, cartoons, people in general, etc covering all aspects of religion? How about making more scifi/fantasy movies for us geeks?

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 1:48 a.m. CST


    by Bloo

    because us geeks don't bring in the money like the we Christians/families what we need is a good sci-fi Christian themed film...maybe something by Stephan Lawhead

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 4:34 a.m. CST


    by kuryakin

    Charles Grady, you mention that it's not a 'personal work of faith' as if this is a bad thing. Pasolini didn't have a religious faith, yet his Gospel According to Saint Matthew is one of the most moving and beautiful religious movies made. You don't have to have faith to make a Jesus movie, you just need talent. Pasolini had it - this chick doesn't.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 4:45 a.m. CST

    Couple of points

    by kuryakin

    First, the immaculate conception refers to Mary not Jesus. SHE was born without sin in order that she could bear Christ. His conception without the old in-out is a separate thing. And to whomever it was who said he didn't find Richard Dawkins persuasive - my friend try searching YouTube for Dawkins and the God Delusion. Watch him discuss clearly, concisely and wittily his views and tell me this guy is not persuasive. Finally , I haven't seen any mention of the innkeeper in this review. I'm curious as I consider my own performance in the Mt Carmel Primary nativity play, 1982, to be the definitive one. Critics called it 'mesmerising' and my mother said 'Your beard kept falling off'

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 4:54 a.m. CST

    Fuck Christmas,

    by rbatty024

    I'm celebrating Festivus!

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Good review Massa. BUT...

    by Ricky Henderson

    You started off so strong with that opening paragraph then it turns out you actually liked this movie? You were so terrifically glib and irreverant but you took it too seriously and it kinda ruined the whole review. Your reviews are like South Park espisodes--funny and satirical, but ruined by a decision to deliver a heartfelt judgement on something. Just stick with the irreverant funny-guy schtick, it suits you better.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 8:30 a.m. CST


    by John Maddening

    I love this review.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 8:46 a.m. CST

    Stephen EFFIN' Lawhead

    by Captain Mal

    Yes! For fuck's sake, I'd *love* to see a cinematic version of the Empyrion saga, but fantasy is the big thing right now, so a better bet would be the Song of Albion--one of the greatest book series' ever.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 9:01 a.m. CST

    Mel's Sequel Maniac Messiah

    by Big Bad Clone

    "How do you kill the son of God when he's already dead?"

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 9:33 a.m. CST

    D'you know, you can say 'fuck' on HBO.

    by performingmonkey

    It's true.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 10 a.m. CST

    occula- Give me a break i'm not an idiot

    by Lovecraftfan

    I know its not a snuff film. It's a figure of speech. When you have a two hour film where you just watch a guy slowly die with little content behind it then that feels like a snuff film to me.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 10:45 a.m. CST

    ever seen one?

    by occula

    'passion' was nothing like a real snuff film. or, for that matter, like actually watching somebody die in person. an actor pretending to be someone dying does not even come close, no matter how the violins swell. please do not sass me about death. thank you. hey pallando - BSG doesn't suck! there, i brought the intellectual level right back where it belongs.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 10:57 a.m. CST

    occula- Of course I haven't seen one

    by Lovecraftfan

    Its called a figure of speech to prove a point specifically obsession over gore without powerful content to back it up. I'm not sure why you can't comprehend the idea of a figure of speech.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST


    by Almost_Human

    Yep, but this is my fun spot. You should see the shit I disturb on political websites. I am of the school of thought that is doesn't matter how and where you get them thinking, as long as they are thinking.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 11:37 a.m. CST

    Keisha Castle-Hughes

    by Mr Incredible

    Considering she's been knocked up ( and it wasn't God ), she must been ridin' more than than whales as of late. Besides, she looks like a guy.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 11:58 a.m. CST

    Does anyone here check out the news much?

    by Nyrdural

    Anyone know whats happening with the EU and NATO? Ever wondered about Israels reformation in 1948, and what it has to do with Ezekiel 37:1-14? Ever wondered at the fact that entire world is always turned towards Israel? Ever considered the prophecies the Bible offers as proof for its reliability? (after all, roughly 1/4 - 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy) Think about where the world is headed, then read about where the Bible says the world will be in Revelation. See any amusing similarities?? Do yourselves a favour; Pay particular attention to number 3 ;)

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 12:24 p.m. CST

    None of this belongs on this website.

    by Reelheed

    Aint it cool that they made a film of the nativity? No. No it is not. This story (the greatest ever so I'm told) has been filmed so very many times. Why make it again? Basically there is a massive market for this sort of opportunistic venture during these times of 'heightened security'. This is possibly the most uncool film ever. Shame on you New Line. Save yourself some money and do a good deed at the same time, buy one of the hundred of versions of the nativity already doing the rounds at your local charity shop.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 12:24 p.m. CST

    POS review! ATTN: Some Dude

    by thebearovingian

    Massa, I thought you'd never get around to actually reviewing the movie. But you came through after setting us all up to think you were going to trash it. I'm surprised no one else has corrected your comment about the "manger being a small cave with live animals in it". A manger is a feeding trough where 'the little Lord Jesus lay down his sweet head', Mary and Joseph had to stay in a STABLE aka the small cave(hence the live animals). And I'm so glad the actors spruce up the "bland dialog (sic)" from the Bible. If only the writers of Fantastic 4 could've written the Holy Book... <P> Some Dude (and the like), are you gonna argue so condescendingly and arrogantly when you stand before the Lord? Don't laugh now. I may be playing a little devil's advocate here but while we stand firm in our beliefs now, none of us really know what happens when our lives end.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 1:48 p.m. CST


    by Cruel_Kingdom

    I think Beverly Hills Cop 3 is a sign of the Apocalypse, as well, right? Wasn't that quoted in the Book of Revelations? "...[W]hen he who hast once looked upon and even pickedethed up a she-male hooker signs upon the dottedeth line to appear in the third unneeded sequel to Beverly Hills fucking Cop, you shall know that thy Lord is returning." Did I quote that correctly?

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 1:49 p.m. CST

    Nyrdural: oops!

    by Cruel_Kingdom

    Supposed to be Beverly Hills Cop 4, my bad.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Re: anchorite

    by Mr Incredible

    This doesn't have anything to do with irony or politics. She got stupid, had sex with some guy, and got pregnant. End of story.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 2:36 p.m. CST

    Captin Mal

    by Bloo

    oh man, I'd love to see Empryion or Albion into a movie(s) man I thought I was the only one...

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 3:23 p.m. CST

    Stephen Lawhead

    by Captain Mal

    Yeah, I've been a fan ever since the somewhat hackneyed "Dragon King Trilogy," lo, many years ago. I even once wrote a screenplay adaptation of "Dream Thief," cuz I'm a dork like that. <p> Sadly, I feel Lawhead has pretty much lost his mojo, and it happened sometime around "Byzantium," which was a decent book, but a marked change from his earlier stuff. Since then, I've really disliked pretty much everything Lawhead's written ("Avalon" was absolutely horrible!), but I still consider myself a fan, because "Albion," "Empyrion," and the original "Pendragon Cycle" are still some of the best reading experiences of my life. <p> Let's rally Hollywood to jump on the Lawhead bandwagon! C'mon, Everett, you and I can begin the crusade!

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Passion of THE CHRIST rocked

    by hatespeech

    and you know it.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Almost Human and Occula

    by Pallando

    1. I am not complaining about the intellectual level here, just pointing out that it's a bit hypocritical for someone who spends time posting on AICN to complain that theologans and religous people should spend more time thinking about how to improve the world 2. Battlestar Galactica most certainly kicks major ass!

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 6:08 p.m. CST


    by Bloo

    I'm with you man, I remmeber buying Byzantium and thinking "yes! Lawhead, Vikings, Monks, muslims" and I left disappointed. I was somewhat impressed with his and his son's work on the "hero" comic book considering it wasn't their idea, they were just commisioned to do the novel(s) and the graphic novel. Curious to read "Hood" but yeah Albion or Emphyrion...even Dream Theief would ;make awesome movies. Comeon Hollywood, find this guy...<p> This may be a good project for Ralph Winter to get on if he's not going to make any forward progress on This Present Darkness...which I started work on a screenplay years ago because like you I'm a dork like that

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 6:31 p.m. CST


    by kuryakin

    Ever wondered about Israels reformation in 1948, and what it has to do with Ezekiel 37:1-14?Ever considered the prophecies the Bible offers as proof for its reliability?....... No. This is because I am a person who uses logic in their everyday life and not a maniac. I don't look to the phases of the moon to decide which way to part my hair either. Thanks for asking.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 7:04 p.m. CST


    by Almost_Human

    Fair enough. As for your response: 1) I have that end covered. This is sport. 2) You sure got that right. BSG is all kinda happenin'.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 7:07 p.m. CST

    Clarification for Pallando

    by Almost_Human

    Also, I never laid the burden of improving our collective lives on the shoulders of theologians and religions people, rather I placed that burden on ALL our collective shoulders. We cool now? Not that it had ever escalated, but you know what I mean.

  • Nov. 30, 2006, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Beverly Hills Cop 3

    by Nyrdural

    Is an ominous sign indeed. @kuryakin So you 'know' the Bible is false, but you don't need to read it or understand it. You were saying something about logic?? ;) Also, I do mean all of it. Reading the odd passage and not liking it doesn't constitute an understanding of it. And by the way, 'Phases of the Moon' are observed by Astrologers and possibly the 'New Age' movement, and are unrelated to Christianity. But you 'know' all about Chrisitanity, right?

  • Dec. 1, 2006, 12:37 a.m. CST

    Yes, lets pile on the violence!

    by Lobanhaki

    I'm being facetious. The Passion of the Christ is about Suffering, so it makes sense to fill the movie back to front with the violence done to him. This movie is not about suffering. It's about one scared young lady being asked to carry the son of God to term, and one young man being asked to stand by her. As for the language? That's a stylistic question which adds a whole level of complexity to things that's not necessary conducive to the film working. I mean, if we were really going for realism, the Scottish and Irish folks would have been speaking different forms of Gaelic, the English Royalty entirely in French, and we'd hardly be able to comprehend a word the Old English speaking Brits were saying. Of course, that would make an already difficult film an incredible ordeal, and Braveheart would have been a cultural curiosity instead of an oscar Winning film. It's a choice one is free to make, but the priority is on making a good movie.

  • Dec. 1, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST

    All you wanks dumping on Christianity...

    by rimshot make me laugh. Just like the goofs on TV who make fun of it. Such an easy target. Make all the insults or cartoons about Jesus you want - you can do so with the comforting knowledge that Christians aren't going to march en masse, or blow people up over it. Wow, you guys are brave. ANYWAY - maybe some of you guys trying to have a "scholarly" debate about Chrisitianity ought to check out C.S. Lewis' book "Mere Christianity". The guy was an atheist in his youth, was an intellectual, dabbled in the occult and placed value only on logical thinking - yet he became a Christian. Go figure - if you have the capacity for it, you posers. And bear this in mind: there are countless Christian organizations that have helped millions, inspired to do so by their belief in the carpenter from Nazareth. Whereas people inspired by another prophet think flying passenger planes into buildings and killing thousands of innocents is an A-ticket to paradise. And before you jump in and point to some of the savagery in Christianity's past, yes, it happened, but Christianity has evolved past its primitive beginnings, whereas Islam is still wallowing in it. Also bear in mind that the only Christian-based terror group, the IRA, threw down its guns when it saw what happened on 9/11. I have yet to hear of a single Islamic group - ah, yes, Islam, "a religion of peace" do that. I'm an agnostic, but I get pretty tired of hearing wisecracks about Christianity from pseudo-intellects that still read Spiderman comics. Peace out.

  • Dec. 1, 2006, 11:23 a.m. CST


    by Bunger!

    Yeah, sure, you are an agnostic who happens to enjoy pumping for the C.S. Lewis crowd and the anti-Islam faction of conservative America. Don't be like Simon Peter, dude, and deny that you are a Christian just because you think we'll like you more... Because we don't! It's too transparently obvious that you are not really an agnostic, but are a christian trying to infiltrate our dark legion here. Christians always seem to think that the C.S. Lewis thing is so compelling just because he converted... But lots of people can be persuaded to adopt the prevailing philosophy of their culture, and Christianity was most CERTAINLY the predominant mindset at Oxford University in the middle 20th century. Yawn. Next strawman please.

  • Dec. 1, 2006, 12:29 p.m. CST

    This movie sucked

    by Cruel_Kingdom

    Saw a critic screening last night. Very, very mediocre. The chick who played Ruth sucked and one of the Three Wise Men had the worst fucking beard ever... Hahaha!

  • Dec. 1, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST


    by Bunger!

    I love it!!! wheee!!!! I agree that Islam is stuck in the dark ages. So is Christianity. So is Judaism. So is any mindset that believes that anything other than rational humanism will save us on this planet. Any mindset that hinges on FAITH in something mythical and merely historical (i.e. religion) may well tap into some good things along the way (charity is nice, forgiveness is good, etc) but is ultimately offbase and constitutes only a detour on the path of progress and enlightenment. The big problem with Christianity (and with Islam too, bigtime, I grant you) is its holier-than-thou, we're-right-and-you-are-wrong, I-pity-the-hellbound-heathans, we'll-convert-you-for-your-own-good, psychological oppressiveness (which, yes, I too engage in in my strident anti-jesus-pumper rhetoric, because it is ultimately the only way to fight the passive aggressive "love the sinner hate the sin, see you in hell when jesus proves himself" mindset). We have to start rabidly combatting this religion thing on every level, including the lowbrow; thousands of years of delusion and righteousness is way too many! Humanity cannot survive another century of trusting non-extistent god to take care of while we busy ourselves persecuting people who don't share our supersitions (worrying about homosexuals, abortions, and what words we can hang on the courthouse wall) instead of attending to the real problems that threaten us (poverty, the evironment, overpopulation)! And yes yes I understand you are pointing out that many religious organizations to attend to such matters, but cut out the superstitious middleman (i.e. missionaries providing medicine and food BUT ALSO foisting their bibles and withholding condoms in the process) and everything will get better.

  • Dec. 2, 2006, 12:45 p.m. CST


    by Some Dude

    Yes, if I ever have the dubious pleasure of facing down a god I will ask him why he is such an asshole and a retard in the christian bible.

  • Dec. 2, 2006, 12:47 p.m. CST


    by Some Dude

    I say the same stuff to muslims as I do to christians. It is not the team I don't like, but the sport. If certain team's fans act better than others, that doesn't make the sport any less stupid.

  • Dec. 2, 2006, 12:47 p.m. CST


    by Some Dude

    I say the same stuff to muslims as I do to christians. It is not the team I don't like, but the sport. If certain team's fans act better than others, that doesn't make the sport any less stupid.

  • Dec. 2, 2006, 12:52 p.m. CST


    by Some Dude

    That wasn't nasty. Anyhow, apply my statements about Strobel to the people he interviews in the books. Also check their sources. You will find that there is no evidence at all in any of Strobel's books that supports a god or a creator. Now, why are you unimpressed by ? Is it not detailed, researched or referenced enough? Have you found a glaring omission or error? If you have, then please share it/them. If you haven't then maybe it isn't the site that is not so impressive, but rather your slowly eroding faith.