5-Minute Red Band Trailer for Paul Bettany’s Legion

176 Comments

Scott Stewart’s “Legion” went into Comic-Con ’09 as a mostly unnoticed film, but I think it came out getting a little bit more attention and respect. Deservedly so, in my opinion, if you’re into the genre. This looks like a classic last stand in a haunted house movie, except the haunted house is a diner in the middle of nowhere, and the monsters are warmongering angels. The filmmakers called it “Angels with Machine Guns” and I think you’ll agree, they weren’t kidding. Check out the 5-minute Red Band trailer for “Legion” that was shown at this year’s Comic-Con below.

After a terrifying biblical apocalypse descends upon the world, a group of strangers stranded in a remote truck stop diner in the Southwest unwittingly become humanity’s last line of defense when they discover the diner’s young waitress is pregnant with the messiah.

Starring Dennis Quaid, Paul Bettany, Kevin Durand, Doug Jones, Kate Walsh, Lucas Black, Tyrese Gibson, Adrianne Palicki, Willa Holland, and Charles S. Dutton. Scott Stewart directs.

The war begins January 22, 2010.


Author: Nix

Editor/Writer at BeyondHollywood.com. Likes: long walks on the beach and Kevin Costner post-apocalyptic movies. Dislikes: 3D, shaky cam, and shaky cam in 3D. Got a site issue? Wanna submit Movie/TV news? Or to email me in regards to anything on the site, you can do so at nix (at) beyondhollywood.com.
  • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

    Whoa!! Coun’t me in! Looks like The Prophecy meets direct to video film Gabriel, but better. I really can’t wait to see this. Love the “God’s/Angels had enough of humans” stories.

  • Dedpool

    Whoa!! Coun’t me in! Looks like The Prophecy meets direct to video film Gabriel, but better. I really can’t wait to see this. Love the “God’s/Angels had enough of humans” stories.

  • Fred

    Looks stupid, smells stupid, tastes stupid (i’m being polite here…).

    I predict it’ll need divine intervention to make it in the charts.

    Angels with uzis, street fighting with feathers, granma scaling walls like a bad alien rip off.

    whoa… it’s the first comment I’ve EVER made about a movie. The preview is so bad that I couldn’t help but google the first site reviewing it and I posted on it… Hey, Jesus freaks out there, don’t blame me, Gawd made me do it… oh, ffs…

    • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

      You can taste it? Is it in tast-o-vision?

    • Chris

      you sound like a relgious nut to me…upset this movie shines a bad light on God, etc…

      taste…really? Get some fucking help

    • Chris

      you sound like a relgious nut to me…upset this movie shines a bad light on God, etc…

      taste…really? Get some fucking help

  • Fred

    Looks stupid, smells stupid, tastes stupid (i’m being polite here…).

    I predict it’ll need divine intervention to make it in the charts.

    Angels with uzis, street fighting with feathers, granma scaling walls like a bad alien rip off.

    whoa… it’s the first comment I’ve EVER made about a movie. The preview is so bad that I couldn’t help but google the first site reviewing it and I posted on it… Hey, Jesus freaks out there, don’t blame me, Gawd made me do it… oh, ffs…

    • Dedpool

      You can taste it? Is it in tast-o-vision?

    • Chris

      you sound like a relgious nut to me…upset this movie shines a bad light on God, etc…

      taste…really? Get some fucking help

  • Jo

    It looks like it might be good to someone who i guess.. doesnt read the bible, I mean im an avid christian and it looks like a good movie, but to me, its unrealistic, and also i didnt understand squat… So this lady in the diner is going to give birth to Jesus, which is idiotic, considering the Apocolypse, or more aptly named The Rapture, will happen when Jesus himself comes to earth, not through someone…
    And its unrealistic that God would ever grow tired of us, God Loves every one of his children with an infinite passion for them… no matter what you do, God will love you, yet it still pains him when you sin.
    It just seems very unrealisitc and idiotic to me

    • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

      Well um here’s the thing. Religion, in all it’s forms are open to interpretation. The bible says he will return but doesn’t say exactly how. Him returning could be through reincarnation. It’s not that impossible. But here’s the biggest thing. The movie is fantasy, based off some ideas in religion. This is not to say that what the movie says is the truth. Just like what the bible says is interpretted through the writer and the church. Don’t believe me? Think of how many different versions of the bible there really are. You have the King James Bible, the NEW King James Version, New American Standard version and so on. This site talks about it. http://www.bible.ca/b-many-versions.htm And then you have the preachers, and priests, and reverands and such who tke this message and interpret them in a more modern way to aloow people to associate it with their everyday life. This movie isn’t a version of a story in the bible. It’s inspired by ideas in it and then fantasy is added to it. To call it idiotic because it doen’t follow your sense of faith or religious beliefs is being biassed. My issue with religion is all the horrors that have been perpetrated in the name of God, like the Crusades and American Colonization (convert or die? Yeah that’s what God wants.). I believe. That’s about as much as I can and will say, but movies like this and the Prophecy intrigue me and I am currently working on something of my own (a comic though). Anyway I am not knocking anyone or there beliefs. That’s not my place. Beleive in what you will. And I will never tell anyone their religion isn’t valid because another religion is. Also not my place. But I will say that everyone is entitled to their beliefs. Because I’m sure he’s looking down on us overjoyed at the love and peace we are showing other’s who don’t agree on religion.

      • Melisa

        actually i think the bible says jesus will return from the sky on…i think a red (or white) horse…just thought id throw that out there. it does say that he’ll return from the heavens…or somethin’…i dunno. lol

        • Bill

          The Bible is pretty specific… and this is just a movie not based at all on it.

        • Scott

          The Bible doesn’t “say” anything. You have to read it.

        • Scott

          The Bible doesn’t “say” anything. You have to read it.

      • Mell

        I definitely agree and couldn’t have said it better.

      • Bill

        Those really aren’t different versions of the bible in the way you lead people to believe… they all say the exact same thing with the “thou shalt not” changed to “You shouldn’t”…. you really should do some research. You are correct this movie is not a movie based on how the world will end according to the Bible… it just borrows some ideas and makes up about 80% or so.

        • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

          Very true, which is why I mentioned preachers, preists, and reverands and their individual takes on the scriptures. Also forgot to mention things like the Koran, and such which are similar but don’t take into account the New Testament and so on. However I basically said the same thing about the movie being based merely ideas brought up in the bible and not the actual scripture, with the rest being sci-fi/fantasy.

          On another note about what someone said about God loving us no matter what. I think what people are doing is basically what people did with the Greek pantheon here, and that’s attributing human reactions and emotions to God. The whole “we’re beyond redemption” thing is basically him giving up on us. And if we were made in his image, and we can give in to despair and heartbreak, shouldn’t the same be possible for God? Also this isn’t the first time God has decided to wipe the slate clean.

          ANYWAY it doesn’t really matter because it’s JUST A MOVIE!! It’s not gonna change lives, or send people running into Satan’s arms. It’s also not gonna have people running to church on Sunday either. My point is that it’s for entertainment and if you’re offended or don’t like it, don’t see it.

          Oh and James I hate to say it, but in this world, all that good that you’re speaking of wouldn’t sell tickets. That’s why movies about that haven’t been made except for by devoutly Christian filmakers. The best you’re gonna get is The Passion, and that was an amazing and powerful movie. But you made some very valid points and yet didn’t insult anyone or start preaching. Read that article but I don’t fully agree with it. Movie doesn’t say God’s a bad guy. I never subscribe to if it’s against humanity it’s bad, cause we’re not always in the right. Maybe it’s the near future. Maybe we just messed up too much and it’s time for God to start over. Michael=Satan doesn’t work for me. He’s not trying to usurp God’s power or even rying to take over heaven, he’s simply trying to help someone that no one else wants to believe in…which is essentially what God would have us do in the situation. Lastly he anticrhist/messiah debate. The thing is most people even if they believe in God may not fully believe in the second coming. And if they do, it’s easier to grasp the idea of him coming back in a human form through another human being, as opposed to floating down from the heavens. However that said this is all someone’s modern day interpretations of things and just a film. No one makes these films as antichristian works. DaVinci Code, Angels & Demons, etc. are all works of fiction and writen for entertainment purposes, nothing else Religion is just like anything else that people write about. It intrigues them and therefore they can let their imaginations run with ideas,but it is in no way an attack at the Christian community and should never be taken as such.

      • James

        1. Jesus hated religion.
        2. Any horrors perpetrated in the name of God since Jesus’ time on earth have been contrary to Jesus’ teaching and guidance.
        3. Things that Christians have created (and continue to strive for) in accordance to Jesus’ teaching & guidance include equal rights for people regardless of race, gender or religion (e.g. the abolition of slavery starting in Ancient Rome, again later in Europe and again in America; and equal rights for women: time and time again in many cultures & countries starting in Ancient Rome); most forms of public welfare; most forms of public education; the basis of western law.
        4. How come Hollywood doesn’t make movies about that stuff?

        • Connla

          “Zeal for your house consumes me” John 2:17. Not the actions of someone who hated religion, more the actions of someone who wanted to preserve it from falling.

          • James

            Jesus took the acts in the temple as an insult against God. He was consumed with righteous anger against such flagrant disrespect for God. He wasn’t defending religion.

        • Charles

          Show me where the bible indicates Jesus hated religion… and read Matthew 5:18-20 while you’re at it.

          • James

            Read verse 17 Charles. Jesus came to fulfil the Law & the Prophets. The people Jesus criticized throughout the gospels of the bible were religious leaders and religious people for their piousness, posturing, hypocrisy, love of money, love of position and their religion of deeds. So they killed him. We know Jesus would have loved those people, but he clearly hated their religious sin. Christianity is a living relationship with God, not a dead religion of rules and rituals.
            In verse 20 Jesus was saying that his listeners needed a different kind of righteousness altogether (love and obedience), not just a more intense version of the Pharisees’ righteousness (legal compliance). Our righteousness must (1) come from what God does in us (relationship), not what we can do by ourselves (religion), (2) be God-centred (relationship) not self-centred (religion), (3) be based on reverence for God (relationship), not approval from people (religion), and (4) go beyond keeping the law to living by the principles behind the law. We can only achieve this in relationship with God.

          • Charles

            Not sure why, but I can’t reply to James directly below, so here it is:

            I’ve read v.17. Have you? What do you suppose ‘fulfill’ means? Abolish? As in, ‘I did not come to abolish the law, I came to [abolish] it’? Or isn’t it obvious that He did “not come to abolish the law”? So then he came to fulfill the law.

            Consider a few definitions of the word fulfill, if you will:

            ful⋅fill  [fool-fil] Show IPA
            –verb (used with object)
            1. to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.
            2. to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands.
            3. to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.): a book that fulfills a long-felt need.
            4. to develop the full potential of (usually used reflexively): She realized that she could never fulfill herself in such work.

            (dictionary.com)

            There is one definition I left out. It’s the one that says fulfill means to abolish. Why? Because we already establish that can’t be the meaning.

            Show me where Jesus criticized anyone for being pious?

            Have you read the whole Bible? Could it really be that Jesus criticized people for their “religion of deeds” that God commanded them to keep? How did you put it? “A dead religion of rules and rituals”? Please. Do you really not see how ridiculous that is? He would be no Son of God at all if He came to preach disobedience to God’s instructions.

            How do you come to a “different kind of righteousness”? He’s clearly talking about Torah here. In which case the righteousness he speaks of is related to Torah. As in, “And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” (Deut. 6:25)

            Interestingly, we still agree on most things. Points 2-4 especially. ESPECIALLY “go beyond keeping the law to living by the principles behind the law.” You said it James…

        • Charles

          “The acts in the temple…”

          Careful. It almost sounds like you’re implying the acts in the temple, as in those who were being obedient to the commandments of God. When in fact,

          “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves…”

          The temple mount was not the place for a market!

          “And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.”

          (Matt. 21:12-13)

          • James

            Re AUGUST 26, 2009 AT 12:10 PM:

            Religious people of the day had turned God’s loving instructions (the Law) into a religious weapon to wield power over others. Jesus came and fulfilled the Law once and for all, restoring our relationship to God. Making us acceptable to him. I agree, he didn’t abolish or disobey it. He fulfiled it. So if we accept Jesus as our saviour we live under God’s grace.

            But in true Jesus style, he expects us to go way further than following rules. By living a life of loving God, each other and our world in obedience to Him, we go far beyond religious deeds. We struggle with this kind of freedom though, that’s why people want to fall back to following rules. Jesus story known as “the prodigal son” is very much a story about the other son too. He religiously did what he thought would win his father’s favour, and struggled to accept that the brother who did the opposite was equally loved and accepted by his father.

            pi⋅ous
            –adjective
            1. having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God or an earnest wish to fulfill religious obligations.
            2. characterized by a hypocritical concern with virtue or religious devotion; sanctimonious.
            3. practiced or used in the name of real or pretended religious motives, or for some ostensibly good object; falsely earnest or sincere: a pious deception.

            Matthew 23 is all about Jesus criticizing religious leaders for all of the above, except for “having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God”, which is obviously a good thing, but not what I mean when I use the word.

    • Bob

      Well, considering the existence of god is pretty unrealistic, I don’t see any problems with it at all.

      • James

        Seems pretty crazy doesn’t it Bob? Have you figured out the person Jesus though?

        He was without doubt the most influential person to ever live. But he was either the most successfully deceptive person, or the most ridiculously wise but equally mad one, or – bizarrely – the son of God as he claimed. The first two are equally unbelievable options, considering the vast good that came from his mere three years of teaching and hanging out with a bunch of nobodies & losers. And the third one isn’t possible if God doesn’t exist.

        Also, hundreds of people witnessed him alive and well again after his torturous public execution. The largest empire and religions of the day couldn’t prove otherwise, and nobody ever has. Then after he left – supposedly returning to a different spiritual dimension – all his closest friends (and family that had known him since childhood) who had absolutely nothing to gain, lost their lives defending his claim to be the son of God. Why would they do that of he was being deceptive or bonkers?

        • Dean

          Using your argument the fact that a movement has done good and/or has been influential means that what it states has to be true. Therefore you cannot argue with the fact that Buddha existed, that Krishna existed etc.. etc.. etc.. There is very little proof that “the person” Jesus existed at all. Jesus was one of the most common names 2000 years ago in Judea, plus there was no Roman census at the times the Bible states that required persons to return to their cities of origin. The Old Testament is a work of fiction based on pre-linguistic Jewish myths and the New Testament is a work of fiction/political action written in accordance with all of the prophecies of the Old Testament. The books of the New Testament were CHOSEN by the Church among hundreds of “books” floating about at the time telling many different Jesus stories.

          But of course you will state that the books were divinely inspired and that the Church leaders were also divinely inspired to chose the right books etc… etc…

          I think this will be a great movie and I don’t care as to what it’s origins are – to me Biblically based fiction is on exactly the same level as Tolkein – in that all of it is entirely man-made.

          • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

            POINT AND MATCH!
            Can we Move on now people. Or should the debate contniue. I for one have read enough on either side and just want to see the movie.

          • James

            It would be ignorant to believe “Jesus didn’t exist” as a forth option to the Jesus question. There is 500 times more evidence for his life than the life of Julius Caesar. If you’d like to investigate the evidence, I’d recommend you read “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel.

    • Michael

      This world is spinning out of control, and it needs a cleansing(2012), Sorry just telling the truth, god has alot to do with hollywood, thats why all of these movies are coming out about the end of days. This world is messed up, if the catholic church followed jesus there would not be one homeless person in this world, people are greedy, one thing is for sure you can’t take it with you when you die.

    • vaughan

      jo, funny u shuld say u read the bible… i think maby u should read it again, tell me when u come across the rapture again… oh wait thats right its not in there at all is it, my mistake.. and funnier still, ill let u in on a little secret , *the apocolypse and the “rapture” are NOT one and the same* (assuming the rapture is indeed in there)< read up on that more to i guess, i mean if your gunna go believing that you might as well know enough about it to speak on it. the guy who thought the concept of "all the faithfull good people being swept up before the apocolypse starts" a guy named cotton mathers
      lol fail

    • vaughan

      jo, funny u shuld say u read the bible… i think maby u should read it again, tell me when u come across the rapture again… oh wait thats right its not in there at all is it, my mistake.. and funnier still, ill let u in on a little secret , *the apocolypse and the “rapture” are NOT one and the same* (assuming the rapture is indeed in there)< read up on that more to i guess, i mean if your gunna go believing that you might as well know enough about it to speak on it. the guy who thought the concept of "all the faithfull good people being swept up before the apocolypse starts" a guy named cotton mathers
      lol fail

    • Trixygirl

      That is why its called a movie, name one single film in existance that has every single true fact and not one single made up for entertainment purposes, and I will hand you jesus right now… This comming from another Avid Christian….. Not to mention, the Bible itself talkes about the end on mankind, so it is obviouse that he planned on getting tired of us.

      Get a clue

    • Trixygirl

      That is why its called a movie, name one single film in existance that has every single true fact and not one single made up for entertainment purposes, and I will hand you jesus right now… This comming from another Avid Christian….. Not to mention, the Bible itself talkes about the end on mankind, so it is obviouse that he planned on getting tired of us.

      Get a clue

  • Jo

    It looks like it might be good to someone who i guess.. doesnt read the bible, I mean im an avid christian and it looks like a good movie, but to me, its unrealistic, and also i didnt understand squat… So this lady in the diner is going to give birth to Jesus, which is idiotic, considering the Apocolypse, or more aptly named The Rapture, will happen when Jesus himself comes to earth, not through someone…
    And its unrealistic that God would ever grow tired of us, God Loves every one of his children with an infinite passion for them… no matter what you do, God will love you, yet it still pains him when you sin.
    It just seems very unrealisitc and idiotic to me

    • Dedpool

      Well um here’s the thing. Religion, in all it’s forms are open to interpretation. The bible says he will return but doesn’t say exactly how. Him returning could be through reincarnation. It’s not that impossible. But here’s the biggest thing. The movie is fantasy, based off some ideas in religion. This is not to say that what the movie says is the truth. Just like what the bible says is interpretted through the writer and the church. Don’t believe me? Think of how many different versions of the bible there really are. You have the King James Bible, the NEW King James Version, New American Standard version and so on. This site talks about it. http://www.bible.ca/b-many-versions.htm And then you have the preachers, and priests, and reverands and such who tke this message and interpret them in a more modern way to aloow people to associate it with their everyday life. This movie isn’t a version of a story in the bible. It’s inspired by ideas in it and then fantasy is added to it. To call it idiotic because it doen’t follow your sense of faith or religious beliefs is being biassed. My issue with religion is all the horrors that have been perpetrated in the name of God, like the Crusades and American Colonization (convert or die? Yeah that’s what God wants.). I believe. That’s about as much as I can and will say, but movies like this and the Prophecy intrigue me and I am currently working on something of my own (a comic though). Anyway I am not knocking anyone or there beliefs. That’s not my place. Beleive in what you will. And I will never tell anyone their religion isn’t valid because another religion is. Also not my place. But I will say that everyone is entitled to their beliefs. Because I’m sure he’s looking down on us overjoyed at the love and peace we are showing other’s who don’t agree on religion.

      • Melisa

        actually i think the bible says jesus will return from the sky on…i think a red (or white) horse…just thought id throw that out there. it does say that he’ll return from the heavens…or somethin’…i dunno. lol

        • Bill

          The Bible is pretty specific… and this is just a movie not based at all on it.

        • Scott

          The Bible doesn’t “say” anything. You have to read it.

        • Scott

          The Bible doesn’t “say” anything. You have to read it.

      • Mell

        I definitely agree and couldn’t have said it better.

      • Bill

        Those really aren’t different versions of the bible in the way you lead people to believe… they all say the exact same thing with the “thou shalt not” changed to “You shouldn’t”…. you really should do some research. You are correct this movie is not a movie based on how the world will end according to the Bible… it just borrows some ideas and makes up about 80% or so.

        • Dedpool

          Very true, which is why I mentioned preachers, preists, and reverands and their individual takes on the scriptures. Also forgot to mention things like the Koran, and such which are similar but don’t take into account the New Testament and so on. However I basically said the same thing about the movie being based merely ideas brought up in the bible and not the actual scripture, with the rest being sci-fi/fantasy.

          On another note about what someone said about God loving us no matter what. I think what people are doing is basically what people did with the Greek pantheon here, and that’s attributing human reactions and emotions to God. The whole “we’re beyond redemption” thing is basically him giving up on us. And if we were made in his image, and we can give in to despair and heartbreak, shouldn’t the same be possible for God? Also this isn’t the first time God has decided to wipe the slate clean.

          ANYWAY it doesn’t really matter because it’s JUST A MOVIE!! It’s not gonna change lives, or send people running into Satan’s arms. It’s also not gonna have people running to church on Sunday either. My point is that it’s for entertainment and if you’re offended or don’t like it, don’t see it.

          Oh and James I hate to say it, but in this world, all that good that you’re speaking of wouldn’t sell tickets. That’s why movies about that haven’t been made except for by devoutly Christian filmakers. The best you’re gonna get is The Passion, and that was an amazing and powerful movie. But you made some very valid points and yet didn’t insult anyone or start preaching. Read that article but I don’t fully agree with it. Movie doesn’t say God’s a bad guy. I never subscribe to if it’s against humanity it’s bad, cause we’re not always in the right. Maybe it’s the near future. Maybe we just messed up too much and it’s time for God to start over. Michael=Satan doesn’t work for me. He’s not trying to usurp God’s power or even rying to take over heaven, he’s simply trying to help someone that no one else wants to believe in…which is essentially what God would have us do in the situation. Lastly he anticrhist/messiah debate. The thing is most people even if they believe in God may not fully believe in the second coming. And if they do, it’s easier to grasp the idea of him coming back in a human form through another human being, as opposed to floating down from the heavens. However that said this is all someone’s modern day interpretations of things and just a film. No one makes these films as antichristian works. DaVinci Code, Angels & Demons, etc. are all works of fiction and writen for entertainment purposes, nothing else Religion is just like anything else that people write about. It intrigues them and therefore they can let their imaginations run with ideas,but it is in no way an attack at the Christian community and should never be taken as such.

      • James

        1. Jesus hated religion.
        2. Any horrors perpetrated in the name of God since Jesus’ time on earth have been contrary to Jesus’ teaching and guidance.
        3. Things that Christians have created (and continue to strive for) in accordance to Jesus’ teaching & guidance include equal rights for people regardless of race, gender or religion (e.g. the abolition of slavery starting in Ancient Rome, again later in Europe and again in America; and equal rights for women: time and time again in many cultures & countries starting in Ancient Rome); most forms of public welfare; most forms of public education; the basis of western law.
        4. How come Hollywood doesn’t make movies about that stuff?

        • Connla

          “Zeal for your house consumes me” John 2:17. Not the actions of someone who hated religion, more the actions of someone who wanted to preserve it from falling.

          • James

            Jesus took the acts in the temple as an insult against God. He was consumed with righteous anger against such flagrant disrespect for God. He wasn’t defending religion.

        • Charles

          Show me where the bible indicates Jesus hated religion… and read Matthew 5:18-20 while you’re at it.

          • James

            Read verse 17 Charles. Jesus came to fulfil the Law & the Prophets. The people Jesus criticized throughout the gospels of the bible were religious leaders and religious people for their piousness, posturing, hypocrisy, love of money, love of position and their religion of deeds. So they killed him. We know Jesus would have loved those people, but he clearly hated their religious sin. Christianity is a living relationship with God, not a dead religion of rules and rituals.
            In verse 20 Jesus was saying that his listeners needed a different kind of righteousness altogether (love and obedience), not just a more intense version of the Pharisees’ righteousness (legal compliance). Our righteousness must (1) come from what God does in us (relationship), not what we can do by ourselves (religion), (2) be God-centred (relationship) not self-centred (religion), (3) be based on reverence for God (relationship), not approval from people (religion), and (4) go beyond keeping the law to living by the principles behind the law. We can only achieve this in relationship with God.

          • Charles

            Not sure why, but I can’t reply to James directly below, so here it is:

            I’ve read v.17. Have you? What do you suppose ‘fulfill’ means? Abolish? As in, ‘I did not come to abolish the law, I came to [abolish] it’? Or isn’t it obvious that He did “not come to abolish the law”? So then he came to fulfill the law.

            Consider a few definitions of the word fulfill, if you will:

            ful⋅fill  [fool-fil] Show IPA
            –verb (used with object)
            1. to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.
            2. to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands.
            3. to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.): a book that fulfills a long-felt need.
            4. to develop the full potential of (usually used reflexively): She realized that she could never fulfill herself in such work.

            (dictionary.com)

            There is one definition I left out. It’s the one that says fulfill means to abolish. Why? Because we already establish that can’t be the meaning.

            Show me where Jesus criticized anyone for being pious?

            Have you read the whole Bible? Could it really be that Jesus criticized people for their “religion of deeds” that God commanded them to keep? How did you put it? “A dead religion of rules and rituals”? Please. Do you really not see how ridiculous that is? He would be no Son of God at all if He came to preach disobedience to God’s instructions.

            How do you come to a “different kind of righteousness”? He’s clearly talking about Torah here. In which case the righteousness he speaks of is related to Torah. As in, “And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” (Deut. 6:25)

            Interestingly, we still agree on most things. Points 2-4 especially. ESPECIALLY “go beyond keeping the law to living by the principles behind the law.” You said it James…

        • Charles

          “The acts in the temple…”

          Careful. It almost sounds like you’re implying the acts in the temple, as in those who were being obedient to the commandments of God. When in fact,

          “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves…”

          The temple mount was not the place for a market!

          “And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.”

          (Matt. 21:12-13)

          • James

            Re AUGUST 26, 2009 AT 12:10 PM:

            Religious people of the day had turned God’s loving instructions (the Law) into a religious weapon to wield power over others. Jesus came and fulfilled the Law once and for all, restoring our relationship to God. Making us acceptable to him. I agree, he didn’t abolish or disobey it. He fulfiled it. So if we accept Jesus as our saviour we live under God’s grace.

            But in true Jesus style, he expects us to go way further than following rules. By living a life of loving God, each other and our world in obedience to Him, we go far beyond religious deeds. We struggle with this kind of freedom though, that’s why people want to fall back to following rules. Jesus story known as “the prodigal son” is very much a story about the other son too. He religiously did what he thought would win his father’s favour, and struggled to accept that the brother who did the opposite was equally loved and accepted by his father.

            pi⋅ous
            –adjective
            1. having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God or an earnest wish to fulfill religious obligations.
            2. characterized by a hypocritical concern with virtue or religious devotion; sanctimonious.
            3. practiced or used in the name of real or pretended religious motives, or for some ostensibly good object; falsely earnest or sincere: a pious deception.

            Matthew 23 is all about Jesus criticizing religious leaders for all of the above, except for “having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God”, which is obviously a good thing, but not what I mean when I use the word.

    • Bob

      Well, considering the existence of god is pretty unrealistic, I don’t see any problems with it at all.

      • James

        Seems pretty crazy doesn’t it Bob? Have you figured out the person Jesus though?

        He was without doubt the most influential person to ever live. But he was either the most successfully deceptive person, or the most ridiculously wise but equally mad one, or – bizarrely – the son of God as he claimed. The first two are equally unbelievable options, considering the vast good that came from his mere three years of teaching and hanging out with a bunch of nobodies & losers. And the third one isn’t possible if God doesn’t exist.

        Also, hundreds of people witnessed him alive and well again after his torturous public execution. The largest empire and religions of the day couldn’t prove otherwise, and nobody ever has. Then after he left – supposedly returning to a different spiritual dimension – all his closest friends (and family that had known him since childhood) who had absolutely nothing to gain, lost their lives defending his claim to be the son of God. Why would they do that of he was being deceptive or bonkers?

        • Dean

          Using your argument the fact that a movement has done good and/or has been influential means that what it states has to be true. Therefore you cannot argue with the fact that Buddha existed, that Krishna existed etc.. etc.. etc.. There is very little proof that “the person” Jesus existed at all. Jesus was one of the most common names 2000 years ago in Judea, plus there was no Roman census at the times the Bible states that required persons to return to their cities of origin. The Old Testament is a work of fiction based on pre-linguistic Jewish myths and the New Testament is a work of fiction/political action written in accordance with all of the prophecies of the Old Testament. The books of the New Testament were CHOSEN by the Church among hundreds of “books” floating about at the time telling many different Jesus stories.

          But of course you will state that the books were divinely inspired and that the Church leaders were also divinely inspired to chose the right books etc… etc…

          I think this will be a great movie and I don’t care as to what it’s origins are – to me Biblically based fiction is on exactly the same level as Tolkein – in that all of it is entirely man-made.

          • Dedpool

            POINT AND MATCH!
            Can we Move on now people. Or should the debate contniue. I for one have read enough on either side and just want to see the movie.

          • James

            It would be ignorant to believe “Jesus didn’t exist” as a forth option to the Jesus question. There is 500 times more evidence for his life than the life of Julius Caesar. If you’d like to investigate the evidence, I’d recommend you read “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel.

    • Michael

      This world is spinning out of control, and it needs a cleansing(2012), Sorry just telling the truth, god has alot to do with hollywood, thats why all of these movies are coming out about the end of days. This world is messed up, if the catholic church followed jesus there would not be one homeless person in this world, people are greedy, one thing is for sure you can’t take it with you when you die.

    • vaughan

      jo, funny u shuld say u read the bible… i think maby u should read it again, tell me when u come across the rapture again… oh wait thats right its not in there at all is it, my mistake.. and funnier still, ill let u in on a little secret , *the apocolypse and the “rapture” are NOT one and the same* (assuming the rapture is indeed in there)< read up on that more to i guess, i mean if your gunna go believing that you might as well know enough about it to speak on it. the guy who thought the concept of "all the faithfull good people being swept up before the apocolypse starts" a guy named cotton mathers
      lol fail

    • Trixygirl

      That is why its called a movie, name one single film in existance that has every single true fact and not one single made up for entertainment purposes, and I will hand you jesus right now… This comming from another Avid Christian….. Not to mention, the Bible itself talkes about the end on mankind, so it is obviouse that he planned on getting tired of us.

      Get a clue

  • http://www.originalgeekspodcast.com/ Dedpool aka Jiinx

    BOTTOM LINE IS….IT’S a MOVIE!!!! Not scripture.

    • Melisa

      lol i agree. ppl dnt need to take this literal.

  • Dedpool

    BOTTOM LINE IS….IT’S a MOVIE!!!! Not scripture.

    • Melisa

      lol i agree. ppl dnt need to take this literal.

  • Thomas

    Wow! How brave! How iconoclastic! Yet another typical ANTI-CHRISTIAN propaganda hit-piece from Hollywood. I don’t know if making this movie qualifies as the unforgivable sin, but it certainly does qualify as a mixture of unbelievably bad taste and unbelievable theology. “But, dude, it’s just fiction!” Yes – but fiction doesn’t have to suck.

  • Thomas

    Wow! How brave! How iconoclastic! Yet another typical ANTI-CHRISTIAN propaganda hit-piece from Hollywood. I don’t know if making this movie qualifies as the unforgivable sin, but it certainly does qualify as a mixture of unbelievably bad taste and unbelievable theology. “But, dude, it’s just fiction!” Yes – but fiction doesn’t have to suck.